4 ms·

I'm not familiar with Emacs+CEDET+magit, but if it has these features, then basically yes - its Intellisense is as good as Visual Studio's: -Method and prope

by Nilzor 13y ago

I'm not familiar with Emacs+CEDET+magit, but if it has these features, then basically yes - its Intellisense is as good as Visual Studio's: -Method and property completion on framework and own methods -Parameter hints on all methods -Enum completion In addition, VS has a solution-understanding which goes way beyond intellisense. For instance I cannot fathom how people are able to work without "Navigate to definition", "Find usages" or "Refactor > Rename" in any development environment.

breckinloggins 13y ago
I've found that you can make Emacs and Vim be just as fancy as Visual Studio when it comes to all this stuff (and when you combine semantic intellisense with plain-ol' fuzzy search, you arguably get even MORE value, because you can do things like "build up an intellisense" by repeatedly calling methods on a dynamic object). BUT, it doesn't work out of the box. You have to set up the plugins right, you have to make sure all the tools respect your compiler and library paths, in some of these environments you have to manually rerun your "tags" program for the editor to pick up the updates. My point is that, even though all this stuff is getting better, it's still pretty far away from "just load stuff into Visual Studio and chances are you'll get a bunch of fancy stuff".
tokenrove 13y ago
I use at least the first two on the list regularly in emacs; I don't have enum completion setup in C++ code, but it may be available or easily addable with some CEDET hacking. The big caveat that configuration is onerous, depending on the target language. I doubt that emacs's IntelliSense-like packages are as good as VS's, certainly in terms of polish and packaging, but what it has is good enough. Also nice is being able to immediately pop up the man page for the symbol under the cursor, as well as language-specific documentation (like the Hyperspec in CL), and the ease of extending it to do exactly what you want, and supporting new languages, can't be beaten. I refuse to work in an environment without jump to definition/references. These things should be considered a bare minimum requirement for a programmer's editor.

by Nilzor 13y ago

breckinloggins 13y ago

I've found that you can make Emacs and Vim be just as fancy as Visual Studio when it comes to all this stuff (and when you combine semantic intellisense with plain-ol' fuzzy search, you arguably get even MORE value, because you can do things like "build up an intellisense" by repeatedly calling methods on a dynamic object). BUT, it doesn't work out of the box. You have to set up the plugins right, you have to make sure all the tools respect your compiler and library paths, in some of these environments you have to manually rerun your "tags" program for the editor to pick up the updates. My point is that, even though all this stuff is getting better, it's still pretty far away from "just load stuff into Visual Studio and chances are you'll get a bunch of fancy stuff".

tokenrove 13y ago

I use at least the first two on the list regularly in emacs; I don't have enum completion setup in C++ code, but it may be available or easily addable with some CEDET hacking. The big caveat that configuration is onerous, depending on the target language. I doubt that emacs's IntelliSense-like packages are as good as VS's, certainly in terms of polish and packaging, but what it has is good enough. Also nice is being able to immediately pop up the man page for the symbol under the cursor, as well as language-specific documentation (like the Hyperspec in CL), and the ease of extending it to do exactly what you want, and supporting new languages, can't be beaten. I refuse to work in an environment without jump to definition/references. These things should be considered a bare minimum requirement for a programmer's editor.