I've never used any of those new editors (ST, Atom, VS Code, ...). Can anyone compare them to the more classic ultraedit? Or said differently: Why would I chose ST3 over one of the classic editors?
Sublime Text 3 marked as recommended build
51–60 of 135 posts
Re: Sublime Text 3 marked as recommended build
#52Now if only I could afford it :D
I understand you're joking, but this is important. It's $70. I know that's a lot to some people, but if you're selling your time as a developer it's probably quite a lot less than 1/2 a day at your usual rate. For a tool that will save you many days a year (and increase your bottomline as much), that's really cheap. If you were a designer and needed Adobe's tools you'd be paying much every month. If you're using Subl…
[deleted]
Re: Sublime Text 3 marked as recommended build
#53I think ST3 really missed the boat. I used to love using Sublime Text 2 (occasionally I still do because it is fast), but I moved on when development stagnated and Jon seemingly disappeared off of the face of the planet, stopped responding to support requests and the like. There is no disputing ST is a great editor, but it has fallen behind in the face of Atom, Webstorm and Visual Studio Code (two of which are free).
I disagree. I had tried out Atom for a little bit (after the v1 general release) and more than once I lost my entire workspace. Either through a computer crash, Atom crash, or something else. Maybe I didn't configure something right, maybe I didn't. Quite frankly I don't care, I think that always properly persisting all unsaved work should be a default. Sublime always persisted all of my workspaces and open tabs perfectly. Everytime where I would lose unsaved data, Sublime would prompt me. After losing my stuff like twice in Atom, I switched back. The new features and everything are great, but I prefer not losing my random unsaved code snippets.
Re: Sublime Text 3 marked as recommended build
#54Maybe I'm biased but it seems like Sublime lost its huge margin in the "editor race". Occasionally I try to use Sublime, but the plugins are always lacking. For my needs, VSCode is already better with better plugins (C, Go, Python), and I'm more productive with it although it lacks some features in the editor itself. And it doesn't feel slower even though it's written in JS. Plus it's open source.
I hope the Sublime author will release it as open source, at least in some IntelliJ style freemium model. That might give it back the boost it needs.
Re: Sublime Text 3 marked as recommended build
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
I understand you're joking, but this is important. It's $70. I know that's a lot to some people, but if you're selling your time as a developer it's probably quite a lot less than 1/2 a day at your usual rate. For a tool that will save you many days a year (and increase your bottomline as much), that's really cheap. If you were a designer and needed Adobe's tools you'd be paying much every month. If you're using Subl…
While I agree with your general point, not everyone lives in places where 70 USD is 'only' half a day's salary. I think some software products could sell more with regional pricing, if someone could crack reliable non-intrusive verification.
Do it with an honour system and leave it up to the customers. Should probably work given that you can keep using an unpaid version forever (at least in ST2 you can).
Re: Sublime Text 3 marked as recommended build
#56Is sublimetext as hackable(extensible) as emacs or atom?
I doubt any editor is as hackable as emacs. The stuff/havoc you can create using advices in emacs is astounding.
Re: Sublime Text 3 marked as recommended build
#57I've never used any of those new editors (ST, Atom, VS Code, ...). Can anyone compare them to the more classic ultraedit? Or said differently: Why would I chose ST3 over one of the classic editors?
Atom and VS Code use the same basic underlying technology and are JavaScript under the hood. With both you can actually open up a chrome like web inspector to help you write and debug plugins. These editors are Open Source and funded by companies whose main source of income is not the editor, but have money (GitHub and Microsoft).
Sublime Text is an editor that brought a lot of new ideas that many editors now adopt (multiple cursors, minimap). It's written in native platform code + python 3. It is closed source and written by a small group of people. Their company only sells Sublime Text.
Personally I prefer intellij. I do use VS Code for text/non project editing but out of ST, VS Code and Atom I think ST is the better editor, it's future is just isn't certain but it's widely used and has a great eco system.
Re: Sublime Text 3 marked as recommended build
#58I think ST3 really missed the boat. I used to love using Sublime Text 2 (occasionally I still do because it is fast), but I moved on when development stagnated and Jon seemingly disappeared off of the face of the planet, stopped responding to support requests and the like. There is no disputing ST is a great editor, but it has fallen behind in the face of Atom, Webstorm and Visual Studio Code (two of which are free).
Genuine question: What do Atom and Visual Studio Code offer that Sublime Text doesn't? I have tried both within the last year and wasn't able to find any significant advantages (except for VS Code's excellent TypeScript experience), but they both ran slower and used more memory. Perhaps I should have used Nuclide? (Not asking about Webstorm because I've used the IntelliJ family of IDEs and understand their advantages…
To be honest I use Atom mostly for writing Markdown. I am a paid subscriber for Webstorm, but I have found that I am using it a bit less lately and have been using Visual Studio Code a lot more, partially because I use TypeScript, love the intellisense and overall the editor is super fast and stable. Atom definitely has some slowness issues they need to overcome and ironically Visual Studio Code is based on Atom, but it is a great editor and there are a heap of plugins out there for it.
In terms of memory usage, Sublime would arguably win the fight (at least it feels that way). I think ST is also lacking in the plugin department these days as well, but I could be wrong about that. The interface of both Atom and VSCode is arguably better as well and maybe things have changed, but the ST3 betas have been pretty buggy in my experience as well. The native Git integration is also pretty great as well (especially in VSCode).
Sublime also lacks a native package manager of which VSCode and Atom have, but there is a third party package manager which works well, so it's a moot point.
Re: Sublime Text 3 marked as recommended build
#59Maybe I'm biased but it seems like Sublime lost its huge margin in the "editor race". Occasionally I try to use Sublime, but the plugins are always lacking. For my needs, VSCode is already better with better plugins (C, Go, Python), and I'm more productive with it although it lacks some features in the editor itself. And it doesn't feel slower even though it's written in JS. Plus it's open source. I hope the Sublime…
Does VSCode have a plugin for C++ code completion yet? There are several for ST.
Re: Sublime Text 3 marked as recommended build
#60I don't see any updated builds or blog post about this. Is it just because the homepage now links to ST3 instead? Because it's been that way for some time now, and the download label still says it's a beta.
Am I missing the real release? Could be a CDN issue?