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

Visual Studio Code 1.7.1

code.visualstudio.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 145 posts

Re: Visual Studio Code 1.7.1

#91

Post by izacus »

satysin wrote: post #47

I enjoy working in C and C++ (on Windows) using Sublime Text however I am thinking of giving VSCode a proper try. I know many people use VSCode for web related development but MS seem quite serious about improving its support for C and C++. My question is does anyone here use VSCode for C and C++? What is your setup? task files, etc?

At this point VSCode doesn't even support C++ IntelliSense and the basic "Go To Implementation" / "Go To Definition" commands mostly don't work.

If you have the full Visual Studio available, the experience will be superior.

Re: Visual Studio Code 1.7.1

#92

Post by newdayrising »

floopidydoopidy wrote: post #66
timdorr wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious why Atom gets so much crap for being an Electron app, whereas VS Code is generally praised for it's speed. Are they doing something significantly different from each other?

Because Microsoft pays people to shill for them on media sources like Hackernews.

Have you compared the two? Let's say there are "shills" on HN - it doesn't change the fact that many people see obvious differences in performance between the two editors. It's objectively verifiable. Maybe you're an anti-MS shill

Re: Visual Studio Code 1.7.1

#93

Post by traskjd »

at-fates-hands wrote: post #84
oblio wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO the long term strategy is Enterprise Javascript on one hand and Azure on the other one. Azure is the obvious one. Enterprise Javascript is basically: 1. Javascript is probably the most popular programming language at the moment (or at least top 3). 2. Since the creation of Node Javascript has entered the realm of back end services applications. 3. There's a lot of Javascript being written these days, and those li…

>> There's a lot of Javascript being written these days, and those lines of code will have to be maintained. Maintained and supported. How many JS libraries have developers jumped on, only to see them die a few years later? Backbone JS is the first that comes to mind. Everybody was using it, but since then, it's pretty much fallen by the wayside and there is still a ton of Backbone code out there that needs maintaini…

Is it dead? Last GH commit shows as 7 days ago? (genuine Q, wondering if I missed something).

It may be less flavour of the month, but that seems par for the course with JS frameworks.

Re: Visual Studio Code 1.7.1

#94

Post by hamandcheese »

HalfwayToDice wrote: post #89

I love Visual Studio Code for a strange reason: I don't actually use it , but by existing and being good, it should force Sublime Text to up its game!

Is there any chance this will ever happen? I've been assuming that sublime has stagnated for at least a year now.

Re: Visual Studio Code 1.7.1

#95

Post by KayL »

octref wrote: post #70
egeozcan wrote: post #11

I wish they left a flag for the people running their own npm mirror. Other than that, it's hard not to be impressed by how quickly they made another release. Congratulations!

If you are interested in getting the latest features, try VSCode Insider version[0]. [0]: https://code.visualstudio.com/insiders

Oh. never known it. how stable is it?

Re: Visual Studio Code 1.7.1

#96

Post by DigitalSea »

HalfwayToDice wrote: post #89

I love Visual Studio Code for a strange reason: I don't actually use it , but by existing and being good, it should force Sublime Text to up its game!

Sublime has served me well for years and I still use it for working with MASSIVE files as all other editors seem to choke on these, but VSCode is leaps and bounds ahead of Sublime Text. A great editor that fell behind a while ago, they didn't step their game up when Atom came out, I doubt VSCode will change anything sadly. Also worth pointing out that VSCode with its debugger, intellisense, addons and other things is ahead of all competitors right now on all fronts.

Re: Visual Studio Code 1.7.1

#97

Post by pixelcloud »

KayL wrote: post #95
octref wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are interested in getting the latest features, try VSCode Insider version[0]. [0]: https://code.visualstudio.com/insiders

Oh. never known it. how stable is it?

Its an insider preview, it will be hit or miss depending on the release. VSCode release updates often and they have broken things in the past, which usually get patched within a few days.

Don't do Insider if you need a guarantee of stability.

Re: Visual Studio Code 1.7.1

#98

Post by pryelluw »

zumu wrote: post #27
arkitaip wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The performance difference between Atom and VS Code is very noticeable on low and mid range PCs. Most of us here on HN are very fortunate that we can afford high end PCs that minimizes performances bottlenecks but we should keep in mind that most of the world isn't so fortunate and that good performance still matters.

I've been developing on a chrome book for the past year. I can confirm that vs code runs very smooth, while atom is finicky and just flat out dies on opening large folders/files.

VSC runs on chromebook? I did not know that. Mind sharing about your experience?

Re: Visual Studio Code 1.7.1

#99

Post by slackstation »

jeresuikkila wrote: post #36
pavlov wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The team Microsoft really seems to be invested in this free code editor. It's great strategic marketing. Making Visual Studio Code costs a fraction of what Microsoft spent on the Surface RT marketing campaign (as an example), and the benefits to their image are much more powerful and long-lasting. The Microsoft brand has been completely reborn in the eyes of developers over the past few years. The lows of 2007-2010 s…

I wish more companies understood the value of great products that people love to use as marketing instead of spending money on advertising.

> I wish more companies understood the value of great products that people love to use as marketing instead of spending money on advertising.

Companies understand. It's just that making something that people truely like is expensive, takes a long time and is risky.

Marketing (in many instances) is cheaper, faster and less risky. Also, it's something you can do with 3rd party providers who do this for many companies. In other words, it's a business problem that can be solved by basically throwing money at it.

Building something usually takes insight into the customer, knowledge on how to build the thing that people want and ongoing work at maintaining that thing that makes people so happy. All of this takes a great amount of internal talent, skill and leadership. If the wrong few key people leave, if the corporate culture changes, if the winds of the stock market and profits shift, this can go away. It's much, much easier to just rebrand your way into people's good graces.

Re: Visual Studio Code 1.7.1

#100

Post by orionblastar »

pavlov wrote: post #53
mattmanser wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get the end game though, what is the strategy? Ultimately, if you end up using Linux .net core + typescript, they seem to be killing off visual studio, IIS, Windows Server, etc. For what? Azure, glorified hosting that might end up a race to the bottom vs AWS & GCE? Selling SQL server licences? I just don't get the strategy. I'm genuinely asking, where is this actually taking them apart from burning a bunch of…

Maybe the end game is the same as it always was: find the next profitable thing and leap on it? Microsoft is opportunistic. They were a major UNIX vendor in the '80s (Xenix); then they were married to IBM with OS/2; until one day they weren't. Microsoft has traditionally been the one to get the hate for this because their moves were so brash in the '90s... But the other big tech companies aren't any better. Apple is…

Microsoft in the 1990s, had tried to find a replacement for DOS partnering up with IBM. Commodore had the Amiga, Atari had the Atari ST, and Apple had the Macintosh and their operating systems were better than DOS. So out of an advanced DOS project came OS/2 and then the GUI for OS/2. IBM had their own OS/2 and Microsoft had their own OS/2 as well.

Microsoft was working on Microsoft OS/2 NT 3.0 when they broke off from IBM, and then renamed it Microsoft Windows NT 3.1 using the Windows 3.X GUI. Microsoft also pushed Windows 3.0 and 3.1 that loaded on top of DOS. IBM had OS/2 2.0 that had WIN-OS2 to run 16 bit Windows apps. Then companies quit making OS/2 native apps and made 16 bit Windows apps instead because OS/2 could run them as did Windows.

The big blow to IBM was Microsoft's Windows Tax to OEMs, that is based on how many computers they made, even if Windows was not installed on the new PCs. So if someone wanted to install IBM's OS/2 or Next's Nextstep for Intel chips, or BeOS for Intel, they still had to pay Microsoft the Windows tax. This forced OEMs to preinstall Windows, because they already paid for it with the Windows tax.

So it was a combination of OS/2 running 16 bit Windows programs and companies not wanting to make an OS/2 native version, and Microsoft marketing Windows to be used instead of OS/2 by bundling it with every OEM PC sold, that stabbed IBM in the back over OS/2.

Yes, Microsoft in the 1990s were ruthless and even bundled Internet Explorer with Windows 95 OSR and Windows 98 that got them investigated by the DOJ for antitrust issues.

Post reply on HN