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

321–330 of 389 posts

Re: Benefits of Not Using an IDE

#321

Post by u801e »

rohansingh wrote: post #289
u801e wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Traffic rules basically give drivers a way to deal with other vehicles going different speeds. So a the driver of a scooter going 20 mph and the driver of a car going 40 mph can share the same road, just like a driver of a truck going 40 mph can share the road with the driver of a car going 60 mph.

And yet, that same car can go 80 or 90 or even over 100 mph, which would be illegal on any road. Why?

Most motor vehicles could attain those speeds, and 100 mph isn't illegal on all roads.

On a steep enough descent, a cyclist could get up to speeds beyond 50 mph, which really isn't safe given the equipment.

Re: Benefits of Not Using an IDE

#322

Post by elondaits »

bastardoperator wrote: post #113
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.

My point was that an IDE runs the static analysis in the background and gives feedback as soon as you type, in the editor itself, instead of having a separate step.

Same with the test... it's easier to react to the test result, check what's failing, re-run the test directly from the IDE.

This would be in addition to the CI/CD... to aid the coder, not just to secure the integrity of the codebase.

Re: Benefits of Not Using an IDE

#323

Post by elondaits »

Lio wrote: post #112
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…

The "local history" feature is not just undo... it can also recover deleted files. I could be wrong but I assume vi doesn't do that. I'd also argue that it's friendlier (surely not faster) to navigate if you need to find the exact point at which you made your mistake.

I know that some editors have a lot of advanced features / plugins for coding. I still think a lot of people prefer editors over IDEs because they don't debug, or lint, or test... not because they're terminal wizards that are slowed down by any sort of GUI.

Re: Benefits of Not Using an IDE

#324

Post by bccdee »

rzwitserloot wrote: post #201
bccdee wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing I hate most about IDEs is when they insinuate themselves into a project's development workflow so deeply that you can't make do without them. Do I have to spin up a whole session of the IDE just to run my test suite? Do I have to dig through eleven nested GUI settings dialogues to find out what the command to build the damn project is, just so I can tweak a build parameter? Is there so much boilerplate or X…

> Do I have to spin up a whole session of the IDE just to run my test suite? In the java ecosystem at least, the answer is no. But in highly CI-based situations, the answer is still no, but you DO need the CI system to be up, and the only way to run a test at all is to just commit something and see the CI system run it, e.g. because the tests require a database engine that isn't installed on your development machine.…

>> Do I have to spin up a whole session of the IDE just to run my test suite?

> what are you on about?

This complaint is based on a .NET project I used to work on. I'm sure this isn't universally the case for everything .NET, but I had to work with one instance of visual studio open in the code repository and a second instance of visual studio open in the test repository. Everything we did was configured in and executed through VS. It was pretty nasty.

Re: Benefits of Not Using an IDE

#325

Post by bccdee »

wheybags wrote: post #281
rzwitserloot wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do I have to spin up a whole session of the IDE just to run my test suite? In the java ecosystem at least, the answer is no. But in highly CI-based situations, the answer is still no, but you DO need the CI system to be up, and the only way to run a test at all is to just commit something and see the CI system run it, e.g. because the tests require a database engine that isn't installed on your development machine.…

If you're not familiar with them, have a look at visual studio SLN files. They are exactly what was described. There is more and more being pushed into the msbuild files instead (a separate format, that is at least theoretically separate from visual studio) but the weird and underdocumented sln file still exists. And msbuild files are absolutely unreadable XML crap anyway, good luck writing one by hand.

> have a look at visual studio SLN files. They are exactly what was described.

You nailed it in one — visual studio is exactly what I was complaining about.

Re: Benefits of Not Using an IDE

#326

Post by clircle »

GlennS wrote: post #53
clircle wrote: post #13

The difference between an IDE and a souped-up vim or emacs configuration is ... very little. Your average fancy pants vim config has auto-completion, debuggers, etc.

I think this is not wrong. When you are using the better quality IDEs (for example C# with Visual Studio, or Java with IntelliJ), they offer you a lot this isn't there in Emacs or VIM. I currently mostly work in Python using Emacs, because I don't know of anything that adds really compelling full-blown IDE features for a dynamically typed language. I will also say that Datagrip and Microsoft SQL Server Studio are bot…

Yes, I agree. Conditional on some "difficult" languages like Java, the experience is quite different. For non-difficult languages like C, R, and Python, the gap is small.

I've also enjoyed the Emacs/Python experience :)

Re: Benefits of Not Using an IDE

#328

Post by dmz73 »

the_third_wave wrote: post #95
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

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 both your and parent's analogy are somewhat off.

IDE is like a big machine that can make a variety of parts to the exact spec very fast with minimal waste. This machine can help even inexperienced operator become productive in short time.

vi/ed is like manual power tools that can accomplish the same task but it takes a lot longer, wastes a lot more material and only experienced operators can be somewhat productive but nowhere near what they could achieve with the big machine.

When users become experts with these tools, they can produce all sorts of custom parts that big machine is not configured for but like they always say - use the right tool for the job: if you are making 5 custom parts then use the hand tools, when you are making hundreds of the same part, use the big machine.

Re: Benefits of Not Using an IDE

#329

Post by paulddraper »

drunkpotato wrote: post #136
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…

The best developers I've found are the ones who know how to work without an IDE, even if their preference is to use one. Contrastingly, the worst, slowest developers I've worked with rely on their IDE without understanding what it's doing for them, and are helpless in new/unsupported situations. They also, 100% of the time, screw up their git repositories on a regular basis, and need someone who knows what they're do…

...But in either case, the programmer is better with the IDE

Re: Benefits of Not Using an IDE

#330

Post by MonkeyClub »

newbamboo wrote: post #50
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…

“Men have become the tools of their tools. Money is not required to buy one necessity of the soul. Most of the luxuries and many of the so-called comforts of life are not only not indispensable, but positive hindrances to the elevation of mankind.” Henry David Thoreau One day the IDE will do most of the coding. Users will just click “ok” and spend most of their time asking IT to reboot and reinstall things until it a…

This isn't an actual verbatim Thoreau quote, it's rather a mishmash of disparate sentences from Walden,[0] so perhaps the use of the quotes is mistaken.

The sentences do carry a general spirit, however, which is very nice and pleasing, until you're reminded that Thoreau's rugged existence in nature was supported by his mum cooking him dinner.

I would instead offer the following sentence from Walden as a better encapsulation:

"The best works of art are the expression of man’s struggle to free himself from this condition, but the effect of our art is merely to make this low state comfortable and that higher state to be forgotten."

Namely, our arts and crafts come to cater to the alleviation of the burden of our physicality, yet neglect the needs of our spirituality.

I doubt that either the command line or an IDE can cater much to spirituality, although I've heard some argue that there's much food for the soul in Emacs and Lisp.

[0] https://gutenberg.org/files/205/205-h/205-h.htm

Post reply on HN