101–110 of 165 posts
Sounds like some people still haven't learned NetBeans or Eclipse. Takes some time getting used to, -just like vim or emacs, but once you get used to the keyboard shortcuts you get everything the author asked for. No mouse needed: check, fuzzy search: check, paths: check, metadata: check, beautiful: check
Works over SSH: not so much.
Am I the only one that found staring at orange hard on the eyes? I guess I should give the author credit for all the work that they put into this rant, seems like a blog post could have done just the same without all the fancy graphics and what not.
The readability bookmarklet is quite handy http://lab.arc90.com/experiments/readability/
That's why I tend to use it more for reading medium-long stories, not fixing website's design.
Sounds like some people still haven't learned NetBeans or Eclipse. Takes some time getting used to, -just like vim or emacs, but once you get used to the keyboard shortcuts you get everything the author asked for. No mouse needed: check, fuzzy search: check, paths: check, metadata: check, beautiful: check
Works over SSH: not so much.
vi dir
When you're inside a file, you can go back up with:
:e ..
I wrote a snappy Ruby-based Vim plugin called LustyExplorer which does fuzzy/flex matching for opening files and switching buffers: http://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=1890
Not to downplay your contributions (thank you), but just letting people know about other options: FuzzyFinder Textmate http://github.com/jamis/fuzzyfinder_textmate (Unfortunately only works with fuzzyfinder up until v2.16) and more recently Command-T http://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=3025
Am I the only one that found staring at orange hard on the eyes? I guess I should give the author credit for all the work that they put into this rant, seems like a blog post could have done just the same without all the fancy graphics and what not.
TO;DR
Am I the only one that found staring at orange hard on the eyes? I guess I should give the author credit for all the work that they put into this rant, seems like a blog post could have done just the same without all the fancy graphics and what not.
Did anyone ever think that maybe the problem is the FILES? Let me ask that one more time. Would people be ranting like this if there were NO FILES? I still believe the "future of programming" is where your code objects are not arbitrarily mapped onto files in the file system, you just manipulate them directly! A few Smalltalks and Lisps out there do this using image-based development. This is where it's at. If you ca…
There are many artificial problems we create for ourselves by using strings for everything. Programming languages in particular have upper limits on expressiveness due to syntax issues. We can't easily annotate expressions or types with extra details without filling the screen with symbols; characters don't scale. Keying every resource with a unique human-readable string causes import conflicts, broken backwards compatibility, and hundred-line diffs - all in the name of renaming one function. Mistakes like ambiguous identifier-scope lookups, block structure/indentation mismatches, and operator precedence issues eat up valuable programmer hours repeatedly, in exactly the same way each time.
We've designed better languages to mitigate these effects, but we can only do so much. We can do static analysis to catch common errors and incremental compilation in the editor itself, but the heuristics can only work in a fraction of innumerable cases. Even simple syntax highlighting is intractable in many cases. If we programmed in structure with an AST-aware editor, whole classes of artificial problems would vanish in an instant. (To be replaced by the UI issues of a whole different paradigm in editors...)
Well, there are plenty of people working toward this, myself included. We'll see.
Am I the only one that found staring at orange hard on the eyes? I guess I should give the author credit for all the work that they put into this rant, seems like a blog post could have done just the same without all the fancy graphics and what not.
javascript:document.body.style.background = "#fff";void(0);