3 ms·
If your text editor works better than PyCharm, then by all means use that instead. However, the article is actually trying to make some point about what an IDE
by mseebach 12y ago
If your text editor works better than PyCharm, then by all means use that instead. However, the article is actually trying to make some point about what an IDE can do that text editors can't so perhaps you'd want to respond to that?
> Maybe everyone needs only 2% of the feature set, and a different 2%, but we all have to pay for the bloat anyway.
This is not a useful mental model for thinking about software. First, big doesn't equal bloated, and one thing my IntelliJ IDEA fanboy colleagues highlight is just how sleek, light weight and fast it is, especially compared with Eclipse (we're in Java land). Second, if everybody only uses 2% of the package, then basic price theory tells us that everybody is only paying for those 2%. (I think, in reality, the number is significantly higher, although I agree that probably nobody uses 100% of the features).
- xtrumanx 12y agoI think the OP has a point. I bought WebStorm (the javascript equivalent of PyCharm) last year and loved it. A couple of updates ago, it started exhibiting a strange behavior where the editor will hang for a few seconds while it loads up the intellisense which is annoying since I don't use intellisense all that much. Jetbrains' products are not immune from bloat.
- gdulli 12y agoThe everyone-uses-a-different-2% is a point that's frequently made about Microsoft Word, and it's not so much literal as a way of explaining why a product like that gets the way it does. If something is bloated, you can't just start removing obscure features because they're not obscure to everyone. So an IDE, also, can get into that state. Which is maybe why I can never find an IDE I like to use. I could only see calling PyCharm "sleek" if that was in comparison to something like Eclipse. It's a better choice than that, but still not the experience that it could be, or that I'm looking for.