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

Putting the I back in IDE

blog.janestreet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 152 posts

Re: Putting the I back in IDE

#41

Post by icebraining »

Const-me wrote: post #10
patientplatypus wrote: post #3

This is cool, I guess. Personally coding in a terminal like window for me would be awful - I like using my mouse to navigate among folders and save stuff etc in Atom/VSCode like environments. Plus, how often are people switching branches of code that the number of key strokes for git becomes a problem? Seems like an overengineered solution for a very niche audience - if it works for them great though.

I agree. Another reasons why I prefer GUI are auto complete, tooltips and context menus. Also for some documents like xml, also when working with other people’s code, I find it useful to collapse/expand blocks of text. All these features pretty much require a GUI-based editor.

> tooltips

Tooltips work in the terminal, they're just text after all. See Vim + YouCompleteMe (which, as the name indicates, also provides auto-complete): https://camo.githubusercontent.com/1f3f922431d5363224b20e994...

> I find it useful to collapse/expand blocks of text

For that you don't even need plugins, folding has been a standard feature for many years

Re: Putting the I back in IDE

#42

Post by cup-of-tea »

fsloth wrote: post #27

Visual Studio does everything within the same window (source code management, code review, diffs). Yes, it's great. It does not need any 'new' paradigm, that's the standard operating modus. It's a good thing this ideology of tools that simplify the process is spreading. But it's not novel. This article sounds like the author never used Visual Studio.

So you got to the third bullet point on the first page, forgot the first two, stopped reading and decided to comment?

Re: Putting the I back in IDE

#43

Post by confounded »

iBelieve wrote: post #6

That's really neat. I love the idea of doing as much as possible from text-based UIs, especially using Emacs. I see this is built on top of Emacs, but it looks like it's entirely custom. It would be interesting to build something like this integrating with standard Emacs features. For example, merge requests could show up in an orgmode agenda list, and reviewing the merge request could be done through a layer on top…

You may be interested in magithub (it’s on MELPA).

Re: Putting the I back in IDE

#44

Post by cup-of-tea »

iBelieve wrote: post #7
patientplatypus wrote: post #3

This is cool, I guess. Personally coding in a terminal like window for me would be awful - I like using my mouse to navigate among folders and save stuff etc in Atom/VSCode like environments. Plus, how often are people switching branches of code that the number of key strokes for git becomes a problem? Seems like an overengineered solution for a very niche audience - if it works for them great though.

I recently started using Emacs in a tiling window manager on Linux after using "standard" GUI editors like PyCharm, AppCode, Atom, VSCode, etc. on macOS. At first, I felt exactly like you describe - it felt so constraining not having a tree view and tabs I could click on. But after a while I got used to using a keyboard shortcut to quickly jump between files or search for a file to open. I'm slowly getting used to it…

Every day around the world a few users discover that the most efficient input tool is directly in front of them, uses both hands and all digits.

Re: Putting the I back in IDE

#45

Post by confounded »

icebraining wrote: post #39
Const-me wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> give emacs a shot. Both Prelude & spacemacs are excellent configs for it. Are there any advantages over Visual Studio + Visual Assist, for C++ or C# languages? Because I see many disadvantages. About text editor features, your workarounds have flaws compared to good GUI. For tooltips, that special region of the terminal is physically separate from the cursor. For folding, a separate, visually distinct indicators of…

Another text editor feature hard to do in text mode is spell checking for strings and comments. Color is already used for syntax highlighting, so wavy red underlines come handy. No wavy red lines, but there's still two different types of coloring (letters vs cell background): https://i1.wp.com/www.tjansson.dk/wp-content/vim-spell-error...

Emacs 25 GUI gives me wavy red lines (via Flyspell).

Re: Putting the I back in IDE

#46

Post by fsloth »

cup-of-tea wrote: post #42
fsloth wrote: post #27

Visual Studio does everything within the same window (source code management, code review, diffs). Yes, it's great. It does not need any 'new' paradigm, that's the standard operating modus. It's a good thing this ideology of tools that simplify the process is spreading. But it's not novel. This article sounds like the author never used Visual Studio.

So you got to the third bullet point on the first page, forgot the first two, stopped reading and decided to comment?

The charitable way to put that would have been "I don't see how the features you listed are related to to the first two bullet points".

I might have misunderstood some technical nuance in the article but I could honestly use the exactly same statements as in the first two bullet points to describe my workflow with VS.

This is not with Git though, so that might complexify the process. Maybe someone who is working with Git repos using a Visual Studio integrated tool can comment on this detail.

Re: Putting the I back in IDE

#47

Post by confounded »

pavlov wrote: post #38

If you walked into an office and saw them using 1984 equipment — fax machines, landlines and Rolodexes — you'd think the company is hopelessly behind times. Jane Street is a cutting-edge technology corporation, but their internal tools use 80*25 text-mode UIs just like the ones you'd find on a 1984 IBM PC/AT. It's not the company's fault: we developers are stuck in the tar pit of an unfortunate local maximum with all…

Would you prefer a web app? Why?

Re: Putting the I back in IDE

#48

Post by oneeyedpigeon »

nartz wrote: post #15

This is pretty cool. Although, on large codebases a la facebook or google size, I would think having a copy of the repo per branch might be intractable - also, somewhat unnecessary since one can just switch branches...

The trouble with 'just switching branches' is that it quickly gets very complicated, if not impossible, without either checking in incomplete code or stashing it.

Re: Putting the I back in IDE

#49

Post by stevedonovan »

confounded wrote: post #47
pavlov wrote: post #38

If you walked into an office and saw them using 1984 equipment — fax machines, landlines and Rolodexes — you'd think the company is hopelessly behind times. Jane Street is a cutting-edge technology corporation, but their internal tools use 80*25 text-mode UIs just like the ones you'd find on a 1984 IBM PC/AT. It's not the company's fault: we developers are stuck in the tar pit of an unfortunate local maximum with all…

Would you prefer a web app? Why?

There is a middle ground between these positions :)

Re: Putting the I back in IDE

#50

Post by dmitriid »

confounded wrote: post #47
pavlov wrote: post #38

If you walked into an office and saw them using 1984 equipment — fax machines, landlines and Rolodexes — you'd think the company is hopelessly behind times. Jane Street is a cutting-edge technology corporation, but their internal tools use 80*25 text-mode UIs just like the ones you'd find on a 1984 IBM PC/AT. It's not the company's fault: we developers are stuck in the tar pit of an unfortunate local maximum with all…

Would you prefer a web app? Why?

I would prefer IntelliJ IDEA for the majority of tasks (sadly, not git integration).
Post reply on HN