People praise IntelliJ it a lot, but my experience with Android Studio and its slowness always reminds me that its writen in java. I have been developing with Monodevelop the last 4 years when I switched to mono/ubuntu and I don't see here nothing that it doesn't have already: cross platform, excellent refactoring support, multiple targets. Maybe its because of my particular use case but I even prefer it to Visual St…
Project Rider – A C# IDE
31–40 of 252 posts
Re: Project Rider – A C# IDE
#32Does anyone here do C# work on a Mac outside of Unity? If so, what kind of project is it?
Re: Project Rider – A C# IDE
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
Visual Studio is one of the best IDE out there, and it is likely to remain better than Rider for at least a while. It surely "comes close" ;)
I dev on C# full time and also use Eclipse for java, and while vs is more professional-looking and featureful, the darn thing feels disgustingly single-threaded. The amount of ways to cause a stop-the-world lock-up is impressive. Vs2015 somewhat improved on its predecessors on this front, but it still has plenty of ways where it drags.
Re: Project Rider – A C# IDE
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't agree. If an IDE takes better hardware to run than Crysis and is so bloated with features that it makes a Epson HX-20 look like a Macbook Air there is a problem. People use Visual Studios because they are used to it.
The problem isn't feature bloat (lots of people need feature X, some others need feature Y). The problem is that you can't properly uncheck/select features you don't want yet in the instealler, so you end up with a lot of stuff you don't need. For performance: If you ask me what is more expensive computationally: Crysis or an IDE; I say an IDE can at least as performance hungry. Nothing strange with that. Try writing…
I don't feel that is an appropriate reaction. Just because software is poorly optimized does not mean we should subject ourselves it.
For instance, eclipse does similar (in my opinion better) auto-completion than Visual Studios and it does not take the same resources, by a long shot.
Re: Project Rider – A C# IDE
#35JetBrains products are very powerful, well designed, customizable, and overall awesome in my experience (ReSharper and PyCharm). Looking forward to this! And really hoping they will have a free edition, although I doubt it.
CLion isn't all that great. It still has major issues analyzing a lot of C++ code (false positive red squiggly lines everywhere), almost 1.5 years after the initial annoncement. Although C# should be a much easier language to deal with, so this one might turn out better.
Re: Project Rider – A C# IDE
#36JetBrains products are very powerful, well designed, customizable, and overall awesome in my experience (ReSharper and PyCharm). Looking forward to this! And really hoping they will have a free edition, although I doubt it.
CLion isn't all that great. It still has major issues analyzing a lot of C++ code (false positive red squiggly lines everywhere), almost 1.5 years after the initial annoncement. Although C# should be a much easier language to deal with, so this one might turn out better.
(I love my ReSharper Ultimate license, and R#++ helps to fill in a lot of Visual Studio's blanks as far as C++ goes, but really it needs to spend another six months incubating.)
Re: Project Rider – A C# IDE
#37Are there any clauses in the Roslyn license that prevents third parties for using it for writing code that directly competes with Microsofts own products such as Visual Studio?
> Will ReSharper take advantage of Roslyn? The short answer to this tremendously popular question is, no, ReSharper will not use Roslyn. There are at least two major reasons behind this.
The first reason is the effort it would take, in terms of rewriting, testing and stabilizing. We’ve been developing and evolving ReSharper for 10 years, and we have a very successful platform for implementing our inspections and refactorings. In many ways, Roslyn is very similar to the model we already have for ReSharper: we build abstract syntax trees of the code and create a semantic model for type resolution which we use to implement the many inspections and refactorings. Replacing that much code would take an enormous amount of time, and risk destabilizing currently working code. We’d rather concentrate on the functionality we want to add or optimize, rather than spend the next release cycle reimplementing what we’ve already got working.
The second reason is architectural. Many things that ReSharper does cannot be supported with Roslyn, as they’re too dependent on concepts in our own code model. Examples of these features include Solution-Wide Error Analysis, code inspections requiring fast lookup of inheritors, and code inspections that require having the “big picture” such as finding unused public classes. In cases where Roslyn does provide suitable core APIs, they don’t provide the benefit of having years of optimization behind them: say, finding all derived types of a given type in Roslyn implies enumerating through all classes and checking whether each of them is derived. On the ReSharper side, this functionality belongs to the core and is highly optimized.
The code model underlying ReSharper features is conceptually different from Roslyn’s code model. This is highlighted by drastically different approaches to processing and updating syntax trees. In contrast to ReSharper, Roslyn syntax trees are immutable, meaning that a new tree is built for every change.
Another core difference is that Roslyn covers exactly two languages, C# and VB.NET, whereas ReSharper architecture is multilingual, supporting cross-language references and non-trivial language mixtures such as Razor. Moreover, ReSharper provides an internal feature framework that streamlines consistent feature coverage for each new supported language. This is something that Roslyn doesn’t have by definition.
Re: Project Rider – A C# IDE
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nope. And they aren't using Roslyn from what I'm aware.
I assume they aren't, because their Resharper codebase already had the bits needed. Still, if you start writing a C# IDE from scratch, wouldn't the obvious choice be using Roslyn for everything from autocomplete to refactorings? Easily half to 90% of the work going into an IDE has to be in the language services (if you want to do the really tricky things well, like completing broken syntax).
Re: Project Rider – A C# IDE
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem isn't feature bloat (lots of people need feature X, some others need feature Y). The problem is that you can't properly uncheck/select features you don't want yet in the instealler, so you end up with a lot of stuff you don't need. For performance: If you ask me what is more expensive computationally: Crysis or an IDE; I say an IDE can at least as performance hungry. Nothing strange with that. Try writing…
>I'm very happy to use a monster gaming machine for coding (professionally) if it increases my productivity even just a little. I don't feel that is an appropriate reaction. Just because software is poorly optimized does not mean we should subject ourselves it. For instance, eclipse does similar (in my opinion better) auto-completion than Visual Studios and it does not take the same resources, by a long shot.
Sure, I'd use an IDE that does what I need but does it faster than VS, in a heartbeat. Obviously. Also, a lot is happening and very few are working professionally in several environments, so compare what they do every day, with what they do occasionally or maybe a long time ago. When I say I think Eclipse is a dog, that probably because the last Eclipse I used was Ganymede (2008) on java 1.5, hitting "run" and getting coffee before my jboss monster had started. I suppose a lot has happened there too.
Most IDE's have much better navigation and autocomplete than VS does out of the box. When I say "VS" I really mean "VS+Resharper" as VS more or less useless without ReSharper. With ReSharper however, it's definitely one of the best IDE's there is, and almost surely the best one for C#, at least until this comes out.
Re: Project Rider – A C# IDE
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem isn't feature bloat (lots of people need feature X, some others need feature Y). The problem is that you can't properly uncheck/select features you don't want yet in the instealler, so you end up with a lot of stuff you don't need. For performance: If you ask me what is more expensive computationally: Crysis or an IDE; I say an IDE can at least as performance hungry. Nothing strange with that. Try writing…
> The problem is that you can't properly uncheck/select features you don't want yet in the instealler, so you end up with a lot of stuff you don't need. Isn't that functionally the same as being bloated?
So it's different from "feature bloat" in the regular sense, that is just tons of buttons for things you don't use.