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

Benefits of Not Using an IDE

alexander-hansen.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 389 posts

Re: Benefits of Not Using an IDE

#111

Post by jcelerier »

lacksconfidence wrote: post #105
mankyd wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Refactoring is where it's at for me. The ability to rename functions and variables across not just a local file, but all references in the code base is huge. Relatedly, the ability to find all usages of a symbol and navigate between them is indispensable for me at this point.

> Relatedly, the ability to find all usages of a symbol and navigate between them is indispensable for me at this point. I don't know if people just aren't aware, but vi and emacs have been doing this since at least the 90s. This isn't some fancy feature that requires an IDE. Recently the support has improved even more through LSP.

> I don't know if people just aren't aware, but vi and emacs have been doing this since at least the 90s. This isn't some fancy feature that requires an IDE. Recently the support has improved even more through LSP.

No, rtags & friends aren't remotely comparable to an IDE which has a semantic understanding of the code, and will catch the uses without false positives.

Re: Benefits of Not Using an IDE

#112

Post by Lio »

elondaits wrote: post #71

There are some things that I feel that IDEs do better than a terminal or editor: - Running tests (test running requires juggling a hierarchy of tests, their results, their declarations, plus with an IDE you can run tests directly from the test declaration) - Lint / Static analysis (you get the warnings automatically as you code) - Debugging (it's easier to watch several things at once, easier to inspect a complex obj…

Seems like the features you’ve mentioned are already available in most editors or through external tools such as test runners/watchers or debuggers.

For example you mention the “local history” feature of Jetbrains IDEs as being essential.

Vim, and I think Emacs, have had that built in for more than 20 years in the form of backed up undo trees.

There are still somethings IDEs can do that editors can’t e.g. deep static analysis, but with LSP support that set is reducing all the time.

Re: Benefits of Not Using an IDE

#113

Post by bastardoperator »

elondaits wrote: post #71

There are some things that I feel that IDEs do better than a terminal or editor: - Running tests (test running requires juggling a hierarchy of tests, their results, their declarations, plus with an IDE you can run tests directly from the test declaration) - Lint / Static analysis (you get the warnings automatically as you code) - Debugging (it's easier to watch several things at once, easier to inspect a complex obj…

I have no need to do any of this locally outside of debugging when I can commit/push early/often and get the same feedback from my CI/CD process. It also solves the "local history" problem because my code lives on a remote. If anything what you're describing sounds like a lack of standardization or gates in order for code to reach production. That's an engineering problem, not an IDE vs text editor issue.

Re: Benefits of Not Using an IDE

#114

Post by beebeepka »

zucker42 wrote: post #73
Waterluvian wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Power drills have batteries or cords and motors that wear down and they’re more expensive and complex and can break more easily and it’s just smarter to bring hand crank tools to the worksite.” - Nobody

People still use shovels even though excavators exist.

People still drink water even though Brawndo exists

Re: Benefits of Not Using an IDE

#115

Post by lacksconfidence »

jcelerier wrote: post #111
lacksconfidence wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Relatedly, the ability to find all usages of a symbol and navigate between them is indispensable for me at this point. I don't know if people just aren't aware, but vi and emacs have been doing this since at least the 90s. This isn't some fancy feature that requires an IDE. Recently the support has improved even more through LSP.

> I don't know if people just aren't aware, but vi and emacs have been doing this since at least the 90s. This isn't some fancy feature that requires an IDE. Recently the support has improved even more through LSP. No, rtags & friends aren't remotely comparable to an IDE which has a semantic understanding of the code, and will catch the uses without false positives.

I mean, I think they are? Sure jumping to a generic definition like getId will give you more choices, but i know which one i want. Having to push space and then 9 to get the second page and choose the one i want isn't the end of the world.

Recently LSP provides exactly what you desire anyways with context sensitive jumps.

Edit: Regardless, perhaps our difference here lies around what the minimum specification is. My reading of this thread and the post i responded to is that people think moving around in code without an IDE means closing one file, navigating to the next file and opening that one. This is patently not how it works, and what i was adressing.

Re: Benefits of Not Using an IDE

#116

Post by the_third_wave »

grogenaut wrote: post #104
the_third_wave wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Power drills are simple tools, they are the 'vi' equivalent of the 'ed' manual drill. The physical equivalent of an IDE would be a laser-guided auto-centering/levelling drill with automatic drill bit changer/sharpener, depth guide, dust evacuation and material sensor with automatic lookup for which hole size and depth to use for the given task. It would weigh 15 kg, need an external power pack and be unusable in tigh…

I think you mean cnc machine. And those are amazingly productive.

No, a CNC machine is a distinct entity which enables the user to create objects which can not be created using only a power drill. The lower-tech predecessor of a CNC machine is a milling machine [1], not a hand-held drill.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milling_(machining)

Re: Benefits of Not Using an IDE

#117

Post by throwaway09223 »

Waterluvian wrote: post #52
wokwokwok wrote: post #34

Listen, long story short: just say no to nonsense like this. Given the choice of a) tooling, or b) no tooling, you’re not being smart, cool or clever by choosing b. Obviously, what tools you pick are important and heavy IDEs like IntelliJ are a trade off between speed and functionality, and yeah, more nimble tools do exist, and it’s definitely worth trying different development tools to see what makes you most produc…

“Power drills have batteries or cords and motors that wear down and they’re more expensive and complex and can break more easily and it’s just smarter to bring hand crank tools to the worksite.” - Nobody

I think you've hit upon an important distinction, because while construction workers won't be bringing hand tools "to the worksite," there are in fact many people who do use hand tools for fine woodworking in their woodshops.

People work with wood for different reasons and people write software for different reasons. All of these tools and approaches can be valid.

Some may be interested in rapid and low cost large scale construction - big teams working fast. Others may be interested in creating a thing of beauty either independently or in small groups of likeminded craftsmen. It shouldn't be surprising that we have many different tools and practices.

Re: Benefits of Not Using an IDE

#118

Post by OJFord »

jcelerier wrote: post #111
lacksconfidence wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Relatedly, the ability to find all usages of a symbol and navigate between them is indispensable for me at this point. I don't know if people just aren't aware, but vi and emacs have been doing this since at least the 90s. This isn't some fancy feature that requires an IDE. Recently the support has improved even more through LSP.

> I don't know if people just aren't aware, but vi and emacs have been doing this since at least the 90s. This isn't some fancy feature that requires an IDE. Recently the support has improved even more through LSP. No, rtags & friends aren't remotely comparable to an IDE which has a semantic understanding of the code, and will catch the uses without false positives.

LSP gives you exactly the same functionality though, since it's what VS Code is also using.

Whether the implementation is prone to false positives (it really shouldn't be) is up the server, not the client (e.g. vim or VS Code). The client actually doesn't have 'a semantic understanding of the code' - that's the point of it, not needing every editor to implement an understanding of every language it wants to support.

Re: Benefits of Not Using an IDE

#119

Post by beebeepka »

S_A_P wrote: post #94

Sometimes people need to prove that they are a rare breed of pure developer. Their superior discipline and tastemaking in the development toolchain far surpasses the masses of regular developers who are dependent on old slow crutches to get any meaningful work done. Meanwhile there are real 10x developers out there that while they care about the tools stay out of the weeds of them. This line of blog post reminds me o…

Real men don't need IDEs, nor filthy GUI tools for kids. Shit was the defacto culture at the two Linux only shops I've worked at

Re: Benefits of Not Using an IDE

#120

Post by Lio »

oneplane wrote: post #59

None of this matters in the slightest as soon as you have to work with other people on stuff. At that point common tooling is more important than specific personalised tooling. If everyone is using IntelliJ and you're using Atom, it's going to be problematic. Not because of either of those tools, but because you now have a discrepancy that is not relevant to the work you're doing yet it's creating problems for the wo…

I don’t quite get this as an argument for forcing a prescribed IDE on team members.

You mention scaffolding tests, things like this can be left to external tools and then it works for all IDEs and all editors.

Then you can let people use what they find most ergonomic.

Post reply on HN