Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Programmers who don't use autocomplete/LSP, how do you do it?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 652 posts

Re: Ask HN: Programmers who don't use autocomplete/LSP, how do you do it?

#431

Post by atomicnumber3 »

modernerd wrote: post #222

I work with two types of LSP/LLM-averse programmers: 1. The HLSP user This group does use an LSP, it turns out, only via you as the conduit: you are their Human Language Server Protocol. They'll ask, ‘can we pair today?’. From that point, navigating code, looking up method names and signatures, and flagging syntax errors before runtime or compile time is your job. How they find their way around when you're not there…

It's weird to me that you group LLMs in with code analysis based LSP autocompleters.

Normal autocomplete is basically a context-aware AST browser. It lets you navigate the program semantically instead of file-based.

LLMs are token predictors.

Re: Ask HN: Programmers who don't use autocomplete/LSP, how do you do it?

#432

Post by registeredcorn »

daltonpinto wrote: post #99

This question reminds me of the first time I met a blind programmer. I asked him how he managed to code, and he replied with something that stayed with me: a good programmer should organize software in such a way that every piece of code has a clear and logical place. The organization should be so intuitive that anyone could build a mental model of the structure and navigate it easily, even without seeing it. It felt…

Regarding organization, I heard an interesting perspective that may be worth consideration that I would like to hear your input on. The opinion went something like this:

> Well written, clean code is amazing. It is also an issue because the second features or specs change, you have to undo/redo the work you just did! Further complicating things are two other real-world concerns:

> 1) Looming deadlines might make the time needed to express "best organized" code to either be executed suboptimaly, or outright incongruities, leading to confusion due to parts A, B, and D being expressed very well, but C, and E-J are left looking wonky.

> 2) It can foster a "Don't touch" mentality. "Oh, Bob (the pro) wrote that! Better not mess with it. I'll work around it with a hack-y solution." Basically it's a suggestion that, "In order to write very well organized code, you have to be an excellent programmer. So what do you do if you work with subpar to average programmers?" It would almost seem to suggest that by writing well organized code, you are giving yourself even more work, because it is intimidating or too daunting to other programmers who aren't at that same level.

I'm not sure how much I agree with those points, myself. I kind of feel like they are a cop-out, a kind of excuse to go with less thought out designs. I do see, however, that as far as real world situations are concerned, managers and even fellow programmers might prefer "good enough" to be done with it. I'm not really sure what to make of it, but it does seem to make a kind of sense.

Re: Ask HN: Programmers who don't use autocomplete/LSP, how do you do it?

#433

Post by maxk42 »

oneeyedpigeon wrote: post #183
thwarted wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My great-grandmother never used a mixer when making cakes or bread, long after mixers were available, and she was able to pump out treats and full meals without batting an eye, the best anyone ever had. I don't have a problem with my "productivity", whatever that means. I'm not trying to write code faster, my own experience is that writing code faster leads to shitter code. I'm not hindered by my tools, and most of m…

> I'm not trying to write code faster, my own experience is that writing code faster leads to shitter code. I'm wondering who these programmers are who are sitting down for eight hours a day, pumping out perfect code at 200wpm without any breaks. I suspect they might not exist.

Your typing speed is not the limiting factor in productivity. You have to think carefully, plan a solution, then put out code without errors. Not using LSPs helps you accurately model the code in your head ahead of time and increases your accuracy. It's slower at first but much faster in the end. Because your typing speed was never the limiting factor in your productivity.

Re: Ask HN: Programmers who don't use autocomplete/LSP, how do you do it?

#434

Post by thesz »

First, surrounding your code is other code that very probably have a clue on what you should do. You do not have to go at the definition to see what to do.

Second, for one written/changed line I have read, perhaps, couple of hundredths of lines of code. This results not in a "fBeggy is a field of a class CBaggy" kind of understanding, but "the general approach to solve problem like this one at hand will be such (see this part) and such (also see this part)."

As a software support engineer, I have twice as low yearly output of (real) LOC (11.5K/y) than is expected from software engineers at, say, IBM. Mostly from the need to read substantial amount of code.

Re: Ask HN: Programmers who don't use autocomplete/LSP, how do you do it?

#436

Post by ustad »

A question which I’m being asked more frequently as time goes by. Something that I just thought of is that i’ve worked mostly on long term projects which i’m usually the main architect. I know how the systems work inside out so I don’t really need IDEs to help me out with showing me where stuff is or being an encyclopaedia of function names, parameters etc.

Its a similar story with frameworks, those who create systems which are mostly frameworks wired together and those who strive for minimal dependencies. You can guess which camp I’m smoking my pipe in.

Re: Ask HN: Programmers who don't use autocomplete/LSP, how do you do it?

#437

Post by dkuntz2 »

brabel wrote: post #184
daltonpinto wrote: post #99

This question reminds me of the first time I met a blind programmer. I asked him how he managed to code, and he replied with something that stayed with me: a good programmer should organize software in such a way that every piece of code has a clear and logical place. The organization should be so intuitive that anyone could build a mental model of the structure and navigate it easily, even without seeing it. It felt…

> Not only do I avoid using LSP features, but I’m also opposed to their use. While they can help with navigation, they may prevent developers from experiencing and addressing the underlying structural issues in their code. LSP by itself will not prevent anything. LSP (using the terminology from OP, but any IDE really) is just a tool like any other which allows you to do things faster. It doesn't matter how organized…

Is it inefficient? Possibly. But I would argue trying to get me to use an IDE and all of the other new fancy tools is more inefficient. My flow works for me, I can navigate through projects and find exactly what I'm looking for pretty quickly, to the point where people who watch me do it comment on how it just looks like a blaze of text to them. And I've found that trying to use IDEs and other tools doesn't make me more efficient, it just slows me down.

I want to be clear, I don't think my workflow is the best, most good, better than everyone else's. But it is mine, and it's the one I'm very proficient and productive with. Vim, tmux, and an assortment of command line tools isn't the right workflow for everybody, but I would argue I'm as, if not more, productive than most people I know using that latest fancy IDE tools.

> Why don't you use automation to help your job when the whole point of your job is automation?

Because I don't see that as automation, I see it as things getting in my way. My brain is set in its ways, and when I try to use tab completion or other nice editing things that people like I feel so slow, I feel like the computer is putting blockers in my way, because I know exactly the line I want to write, and popups and tab-complete break that flow for me.

All power to everyone who can handle that and prefer it, but it's not for me.

Re: Ask HN: Programmers who don't use autocomplete/LSP, how do you do it?

#438

Post by battle-racket »

Maybe it's my ADHD, but I cannot for the life of me stand using an IDE. There's too many distractions - popups, suggestions, underlines, warnings, and a million different buttons cluttering up your screen. That along with an AI assistant would make my head explode.

All these things that supposedly "help" us code end up limiting us in severe ways because we aren't forced to think anymore. Typing, syntax checking, and recalling function definitions isn't the bottleneck to programming. If they are, maybe you're not programming.

Re: Ask HN: Programmers who don't use autocomplete/LSP, how do you do it?

#439

Post by dismalaf »

IshKebab wrote: post #413
dismalaf wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Untyped has an actual meaning, for example, most assembly languages are untyped, same goes for Forth and probably others. Then there's dynamic and weakly typed, ie. JavaScript. Dynamic and strongly typed, Ruby. Static and weakly typed, C. Static and strongly typed, Rust.

It was very clear from the context that I was not talking about Forth or Assembly.

Those terms have actual meaning, I've never heard Python or Ruby referred to as untyped. Because they both definitely have types and are in fact strongly typed.

Like, no one would call Ocaml untyped if you used type inference and didn't spell them out yourself... Or if you used the auto keyword everywhere in C++... The Ruby and Python runtimes both definitely enforce types.

Re: Ask HN: Programmers who don't use autocomplete/LSP, how do you do it?

#440

Post by pbalau »

tasuki wrote: post #375
barrell wrote: post #95

I liken this to asking people who don’t use a GPS how they drive and if they have every intersection memorized. It’s not about absolute knowledge of a codebase, but intimate familiarity. I also don’t think it’s a coincidence most people in the comments seem to be using some flavor of vim. I think using an editor designed before these tools were available will make it much easier than afterwards. I’m not sure I’m the…

> I liken this to asking people who don’t use a GPS how they drive and if they have every intersection memorized. I find people who drive with sat nav often don't learn almost anything about their route (they don't have to! is the whole point!) I at least orient my navigation north side up so I have a basic clue what I'm doing. A friend of mine looks at navigation before driving, then turns it off.

There is a route I drive at least once a week. I can do it without GPS (in my case is Google maps via Android Connect).

Yet, every time I ignored the suggested deviations from the "standard" route, I ended up regretting it.

As an example, last time I was 2h late for a meeting because I ignored the "scenic route" suggested and ended up stuck behind a car crash.

Post reply on HN