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

71–80 of 152 posts

Re: Putting the I back in IDE

#71

Post by darklajid »

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.

Visual Studio without git .. is barely usable. The whole team system integration is a UI disaster, busy, slow and takes gazillion clicks to get anywhere.

I like VS as an IDE. The TFS integration is a nightmare in my opinion.

Re: Putting the I back in IDE

#72

Post by UK-AL »

darklajid wrote: post #71
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.

Visual Studio without git .. is barely usable. The whole team system integration is a UI disaster, busy, slow and takes gazillion clicks to get anywhere. I like VS as an IDE. The TFS integration is a nightmare in my opinion.

Nearly everyone is getting off tfs, and using GIT. So its a non issue.

Re: Putting the I back in IDE

#73

Post by pjmlp »

pavlov wrote: post #64
confounded wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you prefer a web app? Why?

No, HTML is limited in the same way as terminal emulation: it's not the right tool to describe UIs and interactions. I'd like to see more progress made in real desktop interfaces.

> I'd like to see more progress made in real desktop interfaces.

Come to the macOS/Windows developer culture.

Re: Putting the I back in IDE

#74

Post by usrusr »

flukus wrote: post #34
jolmg wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another way to navigate with cd is to use tab completion instead of ls. "cd "+tab and you get a listing of files. You might have your shell configured to cycle among the options with tab or select with arrow keys. If you've selected a directory, press "/"+tab and repeat. If you want to go back up a level, quickly hit ctrl+w to delete the last piece of the path (that's the behavior of vi keybindings, emacs keybindings…

This is great locally or at home, a lot of the time when I'm "browsing" it's on remote windows shares on another continent though, the latency from windows and the network is simply to high for tab completion to be usable, it makes using FTP over dialup seem snappy. This is through cygwin, real linux is another story. I don't know what the difference is between how windows and linux mount remote drives, but the perfo…

I have mostly stopped using cd at all, working with absolute paths + tab almost exclusively. The benefit is that your ctrl + r archive of commands become immediately useful, independent of the current location. It's probably not that useful when you spend the whole day on the command line, but as an occasional visitor I find it quite convenient. I imagine it could make a real difference in a low latency console/high latency filesystem setting, if there is at least some repetition.

Re: Putting the I back in IDE

#75

Post by QasimK »

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...

[git-worktree](https://git-scm.com/docs/git-worktree) allows you to have "copies" of the repo cheaply. This can be useful when switching branches would have a high overhead, for example you need to reconfigure your local environment (database, dependencies, etc.).

Re: Putting the I back in IDE

#76

Post by craigsmansion »

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…

> we developers are stuck

No, only a subset is "stuck" not using the most fancy and shiniest. Janestreet seems to be interested in this particular subset.

Maybe they found a correlation between robustness and efficiency, and not fooling around with tooling for the sake of optics too much. After all, finding correlations is what they do.

If you want to argue "behind times," argue inefficiency, but I think you will come up short on arguments. Not only do they get to have an efficient workflow, they also get to weed out developers whose opinions would make for a poor fit naturally.

Re: Putting the I back in IDE

#77

Post by zimpenfish »

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…

> but their internal tools use 80*25 text-mode UIs

A long time ago, I worked for a company wanting to sell advertising devices with an accompanying booking UI to Titan - we had a shiny web booking system; they had their crufty old 80x25 text mode system.

Turns out that 80x25 text mode system was orders of magnitude faster for the day to day workflow of booking ads on devices, etc.

Re: Putting the I back in IDE

#78

Post by agumonkey »

oblio wrote: post #29
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.

You'd be surprised. Our domain has so much snobbery and elitism that it's entirely possible that a developer tried 1 (one) IDE, maybe decades ago, didn't configure it at all (or couldn't, at the time) and decided for all eternity that IDEs are bad. It's quite funny sometimes when you show someone modern functionality in a modern IDE and they have to accept that the people making IDEs are, basically, not all morons (w…

Even without impatience/ignorance/incompetence. It's very hard to follow what everybody's doing. Seriously hard. Everyday people are making stuff, and have been doing so for 50 years. I'm a regular emacs user and I keep being surprised by new modes/extensions that I never heard of, but were released 2 years ago -_-;

Re: Putting the I back in IDE

#79

Post by tom_mellior »

Finster wrote: post #51

"Every branch of every repo gets its own sandboxed directory. Your revision history in each branch, including uncommitted stuff, is persisted, as are build artifacts. When you switch contexts, each project is just as you left it." Isn't that just svn? Why force a git-shaped peg into an svn-shaped hole?

It's darcs as well, and many other systems. Why not try to improve something that can be a pain when using git?
Post reply on HN