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

Show HN: CodePerfect, a fast, lightweight IDE for Go

codeperfect95.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 65 posts

Re: Show HN: CodePerfect, a fast, lightweight IDE for Go

#51

Post by p0w3n3d »

pjmlp wrote: post #46
p0w3n3d wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

writing desktop UI is really difficult these days. I mean i'm not saying it used to be easier, but the amount of technologies you can use to write a web application or desktop/javascript application and easiness of creation is overwhelming, while the amount of GUI frameworks stays the same, while some of them are decaying (no new version for a long time). So we have objective-c/swift (new!) for macos, MFC for MSVC++,…

Hardly any different from going with C and C++, which could have been wrapped via CGO.

sorry, in theory it's okay, in practice it's much more difficult.

-- edit -- speaking of Qt

Re: Show HN: CodePerfect, a fast, lightweight IDE for Go

#52

Post by pjmlp »

p0w3n3d wrote: post #51
pjmlp wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hardly any different from going with C and C++, which could have been wrapped via CGO.

sorry, in theory it's okay, in practice it's much more difficult. -- edit -- speaking of Qt

CGO supports C++.

Re: Show HN: CodePerfect, a fast, lightweight IDE for Go

#53

Post by pjmlp »

perbu wrote: post #49
pjmlp wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Which are hard to build as calling C or C++ libraries aren't a real option. Using CGO is hardly any different from JNI in complexity.

Cgo is not Go ref https://go-proverbs.github.io/

Last time I checked it is.

https://pkg.go.dev/cmd/cgo

Re: Show HN: CodePerfect, a fast, lightweight IDE for Go

#54

Post by pjmlp »

akdor1154 wrote: post #40
cnity wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I've heard (and what basically makes sense to me) is that falling back to the network layer as an abstraction is borne of web programmers trying their hand at building native applications (they do not know what dynamic linking is), with all that comes of it (both positive and negative).

Pretty sure LSPs communicate by stdin/out don't they? Agree generally.. But I gotta admit, MS's LSP protocol has been successfully implemented by many non-MS IDEs. I'm doubtful this would be the case had they defined a c api instead.

They communicate by all possible OS IPC protocols.

Re: Show HN: CodePerfect, a fast, lightweight IDE for Go

#55

Post by pjmlp »

cnity wrote: post #38
alpaca128 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The negative opinions I've seen weren't exactly calling it a good idea, it went more along the lines of "it's now a distributed system more complex". Though honestly I think it's the best we have right now and it's worth the cost. Partially because I don't like IDEs and LSP doesn't need to be integrated and tailored to one specific environment.

What I've heard (and what basically makes sense to me) is that falling back to the network layer as an abstraction is borne of web programmers trying their hand at building native applications (they do not know what dynamic linking is), with all that comes of it (both positive and negative).

On the contrary, we came to realize the security and stability issues caused by loading foreign code in-process.

Modern hardware is powerful enough to go back to classical UNIX IPC for plugins, while achieving security and host stability in the process.

Plus, shared memory is still a possibility for performance, with the same caveats as loading in-process foreign code.

It is also how Plan 9 works, everyone loves Plan 9.

Re: Show HN: CodePerfect, a fast, lightweight IDE for Go

#57

Post by maccard »

pjmlp wrote: post #46
p0w3n3d wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

writing desktop UI is really difficult these days. I mean i'm not saying it used to be easier, but the amount of technologies you can use to write a web application or desktop/javascript application and easiness of creation is overwhelming, while the amount of GUI frameworks stays the same, while some of them are decaying (no new version for a long time). So we have objective-c/swift (new!) for macos, MFC for MSVC++,…

Hardly any different from going with C and C++, which could have been wrapped via CGO.

Writing c and go, and using c bindings is pretty painful compared to just writing go. It's technically possible Just like being technically correct, it's the worst kind of correct/possible.

Re: Show HN: CodePerfect, a fast, lightweight IDE for Go

#58

Post by robertlagrant »

stakhanov wrote: post #31
robertlagrant wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eclipse was less cool once you had to use it. Only IDE to have a restart option in the file menu, for when it got confused.

I don't understand the past tense here, Eclipse is alive and kicking. I recently had to choose a Java IDE to learn/use. It's pretty much a clean slate for me, as I've done only very little java in the 20-odd years that I've been developing software, and none at all over the last five years. I comparatively looked into Eclipse, NetBeans, VSCode, and IntelliJ, and picked Eclipse. The main drivers of my decision: Eclips…

It's past tense because the situation may have changed since I last used it. It was indeed a very generically (in a good way) built product, designed to accommodate all sorts of UI customisations and project layouts. I think once IBM decided to commoditise their complement a well-meaning software architect got stuck in with a deep plugin architecture, which is very smart but in practice used to get confused a lot. Glad to hear it's better now!

Re: Show HN: CodePerfect, a fast, lightweight IDE for Go

#59

Post by pjmlp »

maccard wrote: post #57
pjmlp wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hardly any different from going with C and C++, which could have been wrapped via CGO.

Writing c and go, and using c bindings is pretty painful compared to just writing go. It's technically possible Just like being technically correct, it's the worst kind of correct/possible.

Just like JNI, if only there were a couple of companies that would embrace JNI to create IDEs...

Re: Show HN: CodePerfect, a fast, lightweight IDE for Go

#60

Post by sureglymop »

laeri wrote: post #10
fowlie wrote: post #8

Been using LazyVim for professional go development for over a year now. I can't see any features promised here that I do not already have. LazyVim is a NeoVim configuration for those who don't know. Together with the golsp its insane how good it is. Sometimes I miss those heavy refactoring functions that Jetbrains provide though, like extract function etc.

Absolutely agree. LunarVim is my NeoVim configuration of choice and 90% of my usual workflow is present and with the missing rest I can still manage to be productive enough. I don't see not having LSP as a positive aspect to mention by their IDE.

I use NeoVim and write the configuration myself. It's great with LSPs and I love the fact that I can interface with my editor in Lua. In the same way, I love how Blenders interface is entirely scriptable with python. I wish Digital Audio Workstations like Ableton Live offered something similar.
Post reply on HN