Live data from Hacker News

Benefits of Not Using an IDE

alexander-hansen.dev

371–380 of 389 posts

Re: Benefits of Not Using an IDE

#371
post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those editors aren't really part of the conversation anymore. I would say they were maybe over 12 years ago. Not so nowadays. People are referring to SublimeText, Vim, Emacs, VSCode as Programming Text editors. VSCode is currently the most popular with vim as purist second and Emacs for "elite" hackers.

I'm really just asking, do you think VSCode is a text editor? I used to put it in the same categories as IDE (and thought that it was really better than Netbeans and Eclipse)

The lines have blurred. I would put it more in the editor category. You really need to download plugins for it to come close to an IDE and it's not as feature complete as say pycharm or Clion.

I would say VSCode is more in the code editor category, but as I said before the lines are blurring. With enough plugins and configuration even vim and emacs can straddle that line.

In general IDE's tend to have more features less bugs, and have all of these features out of the box.

Re: Benefits of Not Using an IDE

#372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your wording is not precise > In order to even get the IDE working with a project you need to configure it to work. Meaning you already have a Maven/SBT/Gradle project and need to get the IDE to work with it.

"it" in this case refers to the project. If it refers to the IDE then the statement is false. So by logic it must refer to the project itself. Why else would I come on here to make some claim that is false?

That's enough. Just move on with your life. End of thread.

Re: Benefits of Not Using an IDE

#373
To be clear, this comment is about IDEs for common languages where they are a viable and general consideration as the topic is about IDEs as a whole. Platforms and/or languages where IDEs are commonly known as limited/awful, with no alternatives, are a moot point and not the root of the topic's points.

The points made and most of these comments are a joke. Basically bad practice and poor use of source control is being blamed on IDEs. Anyone with these problems (in modern times, old projects/approaches are products of their time) simply isn't a competent dev and/or never studied. I don't even recall any of these things being an issue in the first months of learning to code, 10 years ago.

To be a good programmer, don't learn from bad sources and don't be overly lazy to the point you develop bad habits. You can do all of that while still using an IDE. How you use the tools available is on you, not on the tools.

If a tool is so bad it enforces bad practice and has no way to avoid complicating workflow, find a better alternative. A tool is meant to streamline and improve workflow, not hinder it. I've never chosen to use an IDE that has enforced any of the issues being commented on, as if the only alternative is avoiding IDEs outright. I choose to use IDEs that are best-suited for the language I am using, are flexible and allow me to work how I like without convoluting my workflow. I also never commit IDE or user-specific files to a repository as that's just awful practice.

I'm also yet to read a complaint in comments here that claims to be a specific IDE forcing or creating problems that isn't actually about a company/team that has created a terrible dev ecosystem (or backing off an archaic one) for a project that they restricted and boxed into an IDE. Just because poor project management can make a project a nightmare to work with doesn't make the tools involved the problem.

Re: Benefits of Not Using an IDE

#374
post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

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…

You mean when you or a team chooses to embed them into the project's workflow to that degree? Or are you talking about the worst IDEs no one should use while sounding like it is a general IDE issue with the industry standards?

Any decent IDE doesn't enforce such things, it is something questionable devs choose to incorporate. You may inadvertently do this if you don't know an IDE, and try to use excessive features available, but that's still on you for doing so. It shouldn't have been a decision made by someone lacking in knowledge/experience, whether a junior dev or a senior selecting an unknown tool without proper evaluation.

Or are you implying such features from IDEs can somehow be attained by non-IDE toolchains that don't also ingrain you in those toolchains to make use of said features?

Re: Benefits of Not Using an IDE

#375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ironically, it would make you a better swimmer - it will help you build up strength, stamina, and technique. An excellent choice in analogies.

...this is actually a great analogy. Yes, it does; but when you're trying to set a record swimming the English Channel, or escaping from a sinking ship you'd be an idiot to do it deliberately weighing yourself down with weights. I suppose there's something to be said for both ways of doing things ultimately, depending on what situation you're in, and what your goal is. ...but unconditionally advising people to swim w…

> when you're trying to set a record swimming the English Channel

Your training time to competition time is about 99:1 (on the high side for the competition time). The record attempts (or the emergencies) are a poor continuation of this analogy when it comes to programming.

> unconditionally advising people to swim with weights, is simply bad advice

So we should advise them to use floats instead, since it makes swimming so much easier?

Re: Benefits of Not Using an IDE

#376

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…

There is a very large difference between a very smart source code editor (e.g. Visual Studio Code) and a complete IDE. I consider the first essential and the second completely useless. For editing or just navigating the source files, the smarter the editor is, the better. On the other hand I have never seen any IDE where the management of projects (e.g. adding/deleting/moving/renaming files and setting compilation/li…

A lot of this is starting to result in talking semantics of what an IDE is. A powerful/smart code editor, extended to have the functionality most will ever use an IDE for (and definitely incorporating the base definition of what an IDE is), ends up being argued as different because the base product didn't start as an IDE or it isn't as feature-rich as the mature, big-brand IDEs people have grown up hearing. Why people are even playing semantics with this when the topic is making points against tooling, that programmers are very much using with tools like VSCode, I really don't understand.

The tooling and layout of the same functionality you choose to use is something more modern tools, and product versions, have improved upon but is unrelated to what an IDE is. It also differs between tools and IDEs. For you to say you've never used an IDE with simple or fast file handling is either a lie or a severe lack of experience, as almost all decent ones have a 1 or 2-click approach via the explorer (and toolbar/hotkeys if you don't like an explorer side-pane). I actually can't think of any half-decent IDE that doesn't have the same approach for files as popular code editors, and I've used a lot of both for different platforms and languages. The only time I've had noticeable experiences is in cases via command/terminal but we're talking GUI editors here.

Worth noting, I have never in my career found myself mentioning any Eclipse-based IDE as an example of a good IDE. In fact, almost every dev I've ever met regards them as the worst IDEs they have experienced, not as a baseline standard for or expectation of IDEs. It's basically redundant to comment on x experience being bad as anyone that has ever used one already knows that is expected.

Re: Benefits of Not Using an IDE

#377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a very large difference between a very smart source code editor (e.g. Visual Studio Code) and a complete IDE. I consider the first essential and the second completely useless. For editing or just navigating the source files, the smarter the editor is, the better. On the other hand I have never seen any IDE where the management of projects (e.g. adding/deleting/moving/renaming files and setting compilation/li…

> There is a very large difference between a very smart source code editor (e.g. Visual Studio Code) and a complete IDE. I consider the first essential and the second completely useless. I know VSCode is positioned this way in the market, probably to differentiate it from VS. And I switched to it from a much less “smart” editor (TextMate, which I still adore! No offense meant to TM creator/maintainers!). I’m having a…

The comments have just devolved into people arguing or confusing mature big-brand IDEs, with excessive and all-encompassing features, as the definition for an IDE.

Anything lesser, they're calling a simple code editor but, by actual definition, they are referring to a lighter IDE (as the ones that can be installed as base editors they have all extended with plugins/extensions to that point) and then acting like the topic is about the big-brand IDEs, even though it is making points against tooling they are all using with their "editors" just like what you're using VSCode for.

Re: Benefits of Not Using an IDE

#378
post #324

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.…

>> 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 execu…

Poor project management != fault of IDE, it's the one responsible for choosing to configure the project in said way. That's not dismissing the fact that VS and other IDEs allow, and even recommend, nasty setups but, unless they force them, I don't see blaming optional features or poor usage of a tool as a rational reason to write off an entire toolset that can be powerful and productive.

Re: Benefits of Not Using an IDE

#379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. The best swimmers can stay afloat with pounds and pounds of weight dragging the down; the worst swimmers will drown. Doesn't mean weighing you down makes you a better swimmer.

Ironically, it would make you a better swimmer - it will help you build up strength, stamina, and technique. An excellent choice in analogies.

Well the analogy doesn't actually allow for a starter/bad swimmer as they drown first.

Also, swimmers don't swim with weights to improve technique or strength. I'd expect it would result in unorthodox or worsened technique due to trying to swim around the artificial imbalance of the weights.

Re: Benefits of Not Using an IDE

#380
post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not even sure what to make of this. No sane developer I know will work without an IDE, much less prefer not using an IDE. Sure, we can probably write code without an IDE but in what way does that mean I'm a better developer? I feel myself cringing whenever I hear that a developer is going to reach for TextEdit or Notepad++ to write code.

Those editors aren't really part of the conversation anymore. I would say they were maybe over 12 years ago. Not so nowadays. People are referring to SublimeText, Vim, Emacs, VSCode as Programming Text editors. VSCode is currently the most popular with vim as purist second and Emacs for "elite" hackers.

The "programming text editors"/"code editors" of now that are used in place of traditional IDEs are practically always extended to, by definition, being an IDE, albeit a leaner, more custom-fit one.
Post reply on HN