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

Web-based editor

docs.github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 307 posts

Re: Web-based editor

#231

Post by poetaster »

chasely wrote: post #185
azalemeth wrote: post #14

Am I alone in not jumping on the Visual Studio [Code] bandwagon? Other online editors have had "vim modes" for ages (e.g. Overleaf) and frankly I'm unlikely to write a chonking great script or project in a browser on Github -- a minor modification is much more likely. VS Code's codebase is huge . Will Github allow people to use other $EDITORs? (Yes, I'm aware this makes me sound like an old man!)

I've been using a highly-tuned emacs configuration as my IDE for a decade now. Each time I want try to switch to VS Code I find that all my weird little shortcuts are going to take a lot of time to re-learn in VS Code. I should really just take the time to switch to VS Code and rip off the bandaid since I think it would make life easier in the long run.

Can't believe I say this again. Emacs in evil mode.

Re: Web-based editor

#232

Post by lights0123 »

dschuessler wrote: post #116
adevx wrote: post #63

If you don't want to tie in with GitHub, there is also a vscode browser version called "code server" https://github.com/cdr/code-server I've been using it for the last couple of weeks on a development VPS and really love it. I'm considering moving my dev environment over to the server and just open a browser to do all the work.

Is there any upside compared to using the SSH Remote extension? https://code.visualstudio.com/docs/remote/ssh It automatically sets up the server for me on any machine I can SSH into and I can use real VSCode instead of the browser version.

That is proprietary, code-server is completely Free

Re: Web-based editor

#233

Post by eugene0 »

moogly wrote: post #52

I've been using this for a while. Very, very, very handy for - Just exploring some code. - Quickly pull up as reference code w/ decent navigation without having to checkout locally or navigate forward/back in the source tree in GitHub. - When reviewing PRs and wanting to check out some surrounding code that is not part of the actual PR. - If you want to quickly commit something really small and trivial in master/a br…

> - When reviewing PRs and wanting to check out some surrounding code that is not part of the actual PR.

It's interesting to see how suitable is the IDE for code review for different people. For me, it's usually pretty much overload, since it's focused on writing, not reading. But GitHub is really doing a great job of eliminating the necessity of cloning the branch for the review.

I'm doing a few experiments in this area on a tool called Viezly (example: https://viezly.com/change_requests/3986). Its focus is on dependency and navigation. So it's a light version of IDE-in-the-cloud for these cases of code review.

Re: Web-based editor

#234

Post by hajile »

dragonwriter wrote: post #193
hajile wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last I checked, most of the MS-owned language servers used proprietary licenses. An example is the Python language server https://github.com/microsoft/pylance-release They base it 90% on the open-source pyright library. Then the lock down all their own enhancements. https://github.com/microsoft/pyright This is why MIT isn't always the correct choice. GPL wouldn't hurt devs at all and would protect from this kind of g…

> This is why MIT isn't always the correct choice. GPL wouldn't hurt devs at all and would protect from this kind of garbage from MS. But would it protect against Pylance existing, or would it just be more expensive to develop but still proprietary (and possibly not free-as-in-beer), or would it be Free? There's only one of those three where devs (as opposed to Free Software ideologues) win, and one where both lose.…

If pyright were GPL'd then MS would own their own pieces, but the contributions would be owned by others and that would prevent the relicensing you're talking aobut.

MS could pay a dev team to write everything themselves, but it's a matter of cost. Given the choice between paying for a ground-up development for a tiny gain or using the open project, inertia would push toward the open project.

Finally, there's the question of trust.

Why does MS feel the need to lock these things down?

It's obvious now that "Open" was a hook. It killed off all the competitors like Atom or Brackets and even mostly killed off other editors like Sublime. The only question now is the final goal of their lock-in. The only real observation is that all of "the new MS that loves devs" was just more of the classic Microsoft we've known for decades.

Re: Web-based editor

#235

Post by aurbano »

eugene0 wrote: post #233
moogly wrote: post #52

I've been using this for a while. Very, very, very handy for - Just exploring some code. - Quickly pull up as reference code w/ decent navigation without having to checkout locally or navigate forward/back in the source tree in GitHub. - When reviewing PRs and wanting to check out some surrounding code that is not part of the actual PR. - If you want to quickly commit something really small and trivial in master/a br…

> - When reviewing PRs and wanting to check out some surrounding code that is not part of the actual PR. It's interesting to see how suitable is the IDE for code review for different people. For me, it's usually pretty much overload, since it's focused on writing, not reading. But GitHub is really doing a great job of eliminating the necessity of cloning the branch for the review. I'm doing a few experiments in this…

That's a really neat way of visualising changed files!

Re: Web-based editor

#236

Post by 5e92cb50239222b »

Godel_unicode wrote: post #201
TooKool4This wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Many people talk about vim lately, probably the most I've seen and I'm still not sure why. Extrapolating from personal experience, I think this might be down to Covid WFH where more people have had to ssh into remote machines and may need to edit files so might choose to use vim as it’s easily available. And vim is something that I find is better learned progressively where you pick up 1 or 2 tricks every week or s…

For what it's worth, you can open a remote directory via SSH from vscode. https://code.visualstudio.com/docs/remote/linux Want to have your mind blown? Microsoft (yes that Microsoft) officially supports remote development on Windows Server via SSH. As in, run vscode on your Linux box, create an SSH remote on your Windows Server, develop remotely on the server via SSH. Fully supported.

>supports remote development on Windows Server via SSH

I was excited for this as a way to avoid touching Windows altogether, but it works pretty crappily in my experience.

Re: Web-based editor

#237

Post by eveningsteps »

azalemeth wrote: post #184
kumarvvr wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am a developer for almost 15 years now. My primary operating system is windows. I have used Linux but only sparingly. I have used many IDEs. I have never ever felt the need to use vim. Is it fair to say, because VSCode does not have a "vim mode", it is somehow inferior as an editor? I seriously don't get it. I have used VSCode almost from day one. It is a fantastic editor and quite a capable tool. I seriously love…

I'm someone who also writes code for a living. Linux and MacOS are my primary OSes (in that order). I've used Windows, but only sparingly. I've written a lot of C, a lot of scripting languages, and a bit of C++. I've used many IDEs. For me, the "command line" workflow of Makefiles, vim & gdb are really, well, great. When I was a graduate student, I did a lot of pair-programming with a vim wizard who showed me just ho…

> ... VS feels like a big, bloated IDE where you have to memorise the location of 4e6 different GUI positions and take your hands continually off the keyboard to do anything.

it sounds like you are completely ignoring the command palette, which allows for a quick, keyboard-only way of interacting with VS Code. have you given it a chance?

Re: Web-based editor

#238

Post by 5e92cb50239222b »

mytailorisrich wrote: post #214
Godel_unicode wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For what it's worth, you can open a remote directory via SSH from vscode. https://code.visualstudio.com/docs/remote/linux Want to have your mind blown? Microsoft (yes that Microsoft) officially supports remote development on Windows Server via SSH. As in, run vscode on your Linux box, create an SSH remote on your Windows Server, develop remotely on the server via SSH. Fully supported.

I'm curious: What is a typical use case for this?

Porting cross-platform projects to the operating system that looks and feels very different to pretty much everything else out there. I prefer doing that from the comfort of my primary desktop OS.

Re: Web-based editor

#239

Post by stophecom »

moogly wrote: post #52

I've been using this for a while. Very, very, very handy for - Just exploring some code. - Quickly pull up as reference code w/ decent navigation without having to checkout locally or navigate forward/back in the source tree in GitHub. - When reviewing PRs and wanting to check out some surrounding code that is not part of the actual PR. - If you want to quickly commit something really small and trivial in master/a br…

> If you want to quickly commit something really small and trivial in master/a branch/a PR without having to do the whole stash/checkout/pull/change/commit/push rigmarole (like if you're in the middle of doing something else).

Agree, except code formatting (e.g. w/ Prettier) is missing - which would make it extremely helpful to do small PRs.

Re: Web-based editor

#240

Post by dragonwriter »

hajile wrote: post #234
dragonwriter wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is why MIT isn't always the correct choice. GPL wouldn't hurt devs at all and would protect from this kind of garbage from MS. But would it protect against Pylance existing, or would it just be more expensive to develop but still proprietary (and possibly not free-as-in-beer), or would it be Free? There's only one of those three where devs (as opposed to Free Software ideologues) win, and one where both lose.…

If pyright were GPL'd then MS would own their own pieces, but the contributions would be owned by others and that would prevent the relicensing you're talking aobut. MS could pay a dev team to write everything themselves, but it's a matter of cost. Given the choice between paying for a ground-up development for a tiny gain or using the open project, inertia would push toward the open project. Finally, there's the que…

> If pyright were GPL'd then MS would own their own pieces, but the contributions would be owned by others

So in your hypothetical, Microsoft not only uses the GPL instead of MIT outbound, but accepts contributions under the GPL instead of the CLA it uses for most MS open source project contributions, including pyright, inbound, etc.?

Post reply on HN