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

641–650 of 652 posts

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

#641

Post by scarface_74 »

rnewme wrote: post #629
scarface_74 wrote: post #525

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many large applications are made with no dependencies or frameworks? In another life, I worked on a SaaS app around railroad car repair billing. These are the industry requirements. https://public.railinc.com/sites/default/files/documents/CRB... And this doesn’t include addendums, regulation updates, industry norms, extra requirements by clients etc No matter how well structured the codebase is, it will become la…

I perhaps didn't express my point clear enough. If you're developing net framework, ios or android sdk itself, you're trying to be consistent and well structured, and you'll probably mostly work in one part of the code base. Then app dev will again use your structured expected layout as part of his structured system. The point wasn't to know the whole code base, but rather that it's made in a way that it makes sense…

And even if you make it consistent, using domain driven names, etc.

The method names are going to be different and not easily guessed. Why wouldn’t I use an IDE feature where I put a “.” at the end of the class instance and use autocomplete to tell me the methods? Why wouldn’t I use an IDE feature where when I rename a method, it automatically renames all of the references in an entire project?

Unless you are using reflection, this can be done in a provably correct way in a statically typed language?

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

#642

Post by marssaxman »

jpeggtulsa wrote: post #617
sly010 wrote: post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The goal of programming is not to write code (however much I enjoy that part), it is to solve problems. Right, which is exactly why autocomplete is not a huge help.

That makes no sense whatsoever. Autocomplete helps you speed up the writing of the code so you can focus on solving the problems more often.

Writing the code doesn't generally take a great deal of time once I know what code needs to be written, so there's little value to be gained in optimizing that part of the process. I can think while I type, after all.

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

#643

Post by aguaviva »

nox101 wrote: post #444
aguaviva wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To think that some people are still writing code like in the 70s . This is a muddled hyperbolization. These features barely existed (in terms of widespread use) even 10 years ago, but everyone got along just fine, even founded FAANG-scale companies without them, and so on. Yet you're making it sound like if you aren't using them, then you're basically still writing COBOL. Not using productivity tools is just hurting…

Autocompletion has been common for at least 29 years since MS added it to Visual Studio.

[dead]

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

#644

Post by dismalaf »

IshKebab wrote: post #630
dismalaf wrote: post #628

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Adding type annotations doesn't make Python statically typed. Type annotations are borderline meaningless, they're basically just a type of documentation that helps your tools spit out better suggestions and makes your tools yell at junior developers. Python isn't taking advantage of type annotations to produce better compiled code or anything, it's still a dynamic language that infers types at runtime.

Yeah that's exactly what I was saying. So what word would you use to mean "dynamically typed without static type annotations"? > your tools yell at junior developers. Oh you're one of those ...

> one of those...

If by one of those you mean a solopreneur who doesn't have any junior devs to yell at then yes. If I wanted to use static types I'd use an actual statically typed language with all of the performance benefits (Go, Java, Rust, Haskell, Ocaml, etc...).

Using a dynamically typed/interpreted language with type annotations is literally the worst of all worlds...

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

#645

Post by imron »

Seb-C wrote: post #594
imron wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same. ctags all the way!

I'm curious: what language are you working on where ctags are useful? I spent years fighting with those to try to have a satisfying setup that worked, but found ctags to be high maintenance (always breaking in some way, not context-aware on untyped languages, index getting obsolete quickly and taking forever to update...), and I never looked back since trying coc.vim.

I've used it extensively with c++, rust and python, and to a lesser extent with a handful of other languages

Non context aware is a problem. For python I had to add `--python-kinds=-i` to `~/.ctags` so that it ignores imports when generating the tags.

I've also bound `t` to `:tn` and `r` to `:tp` so I can easily go back and forwards between tags if there is more than one match.

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

#646

Post by 01jonny01 »

Up until a few years ago I was still using notepad.exe and uploading via FTP and managed fine...fine as in my business made $700k in a year and my programming was ability was poor.

Now I use VSCode and pushto github. Has it made me any better? A little I guess. The real step change for me was ChatGPT. For scrappy slow learners like myself it allows me to x10 my output.

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

#647

Post by mjrbrennan »

pbalau wrote: post #440
tasuki wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Yes I find this is the main benefit of Google Maps GPS now, predicting and avoiding traffic whenever possible.

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

#648

Post by bdangubic »

mjrbrennan wrote: post #647
pbalau wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Yes I find this is the main benefit of Google Maps GPS now, predicting and avoiding traffic whenever possible.

waze is far, far superior at that

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

#649

Post by mjrbrennan »

bdangubic wrote: post #648
mjrbrennan wrote: post #647

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes I find this is the main benefit of Google Maps GPS now, predicting and avoiding traffic whenever possible.

waze is far, far superior at that

I thought Waze was owned by Google though? I assumed they would use Waze’s traffic data.

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

#650

Post by bdangubic »

mjrbrennan wrote: post #649
bdangubic wrote: post #648

Earlier quoted context omitted.

waze is far, far superior at that

I thought Waze was owned by Google though? I assumed they would use Waze’s traffic data.

as crazy as it sounds - they don’t. you can open them side-by-side and you’ll often see much different routes.
Post reply on HN