M
Matt Todd
Please be kind.
M.T.
M.T.
D
David Vallner
Chad said:
"I've seen situations..."
Dear lord in heavens, for the love of all that's good and holy, not this
again.
But.
Installed size is so much not an argument if you have the iron to handle
it. If you don't, it's still not an argument since the fact you have to
work on Aunt Tilly's internet-enabled fridge to do your coding work
doesn't make an editor "better". If program performance is a metric you
consider honestly important, what the hell are you doing on a Ruby
mailing list at all?
Just how often do you edit text files of insane sizes again? If and only
if it were the bulk of your editing work, would it be a relevant reason
to choose your primary editor as one that can open those files. Unless
you work on Aunt Tilly's internet-enabled fridge where you can't fit two
to use one as a backup for these cases.
And... To save and quit, vim is ESC : w g - five keypresses. With the
shift key having to be held down too - if running in console mode, I
doubt it's possible to detect standalone modifier keypresses. Emacs is
C-x C-c Space Space (for one buffer) - siz keypresses. ZOMG
FINGERSTRAIN! (Muah.)
<anal-retention>
With sticky modifier keys on, you don't even have to twist a pinky
finger to hold down a modifier key for those combinations, ESC is
horribly out of the way unless you remap your keyboard, and the space
key being pressed repeatedly makes it faster since you don't need to
reacquire a target. I'd even go as far as to say that the C-x C-s C-x
C-c combo being not much worse a case for the multiple buffer case,
since all the keys needed are close on the US QWERTY keyboard and you
only need the left hand to type them. *groan*
</anal-retention>
It boils down to personal preference and nothing more. Vim is probably
better for people that can estimate line numbers in their head, since
you win most of the efficiency in being able to type the commands off
the top of your head, Emacs for if you can hack elisp like there's no
tomorrow (the vim scripting language is rather basic and would probably
hit a complexity wall with some problems), or if you can work easier
with integration of all the features as opposed to the vim way of
hopping between console windows / screen wossnames / alien-machine
interface pseudopods.
So... Cut out the editor trolling, neither side has real arguments
anyway, just different needs that the editors satisfy in different measures.
For interested parties, I use neither side of that holy war. SciTE /
gedit / kate depending on current operating system for simple things or
in a pinch, nano / joe from a console for five-second config file
touchup, Eclipse whenever I need a feature that's outside the scope of
actually editing text and more the responsibility of a development tool.
(3.2 working sets considered sexy.)
David Vallner
D
David Vallner
Charles said:
Now this is one phenomenon I never understood. Why is that a good thing?!
David Vallner
D
David Vallner
Tim said:
Komodo somehow managed the last time I tried with Python. It would offer
autocomplete for all method calls it saw used on the same object in that
method before, and all methods for an object that was created in that
method. Wonder if they have the equivalent done with Ruby - haven't
tried the versions with support for the language yet. You might want to
have a look though. The personal license isn't that expensive either,
and probably for work, neither the commercial one if you're in a
position to pester your boss for development tools.
David Vallner
J
Jeremy Henty
Some people feel more secure if they're closer to the foundations.
You can see them in swimming pools, staying in the shallow end so they
can keep a foot on the bottom.
Regards,
Jeremy Henty
W
William Crawford
David said:
I just checked again, and their page say 'full support' for several
languages including Ruby, but when you go to the 'compare versions'
page, autocomplete doesn't have Ruby listed. As that would be the only
reason I would buy it, I find that a shame.
It's worth noting that KDE's Quanta wishlist has just confirmed Ruby
autocomplete as a wish. More people may want to vote on it and make it
happen. http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=129279
A
Alex Young
Actually, I get bitten by this at least every week, but the other wayDavid said:
around - I get some generated XML files that have stupidly long lines,
and they hang Vim - at least on Windows. I can't always wrap the lines
with fmt, either - that can break the data.
Emacs broke my wrists. Actually, that's not fair - emacs, non-ergonomic
keyboards, and a requirement to be able to get set up and productive
quickly on a fresh box broke my wrists. Vim fits me better out of the
box than emacs now.
...which is where the Ruby interface comes in handy
Agreed. If there wasn't a market for both, one or the other would have
died out by now.
M
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky
1. As Eleanor Roosevelt said, "No one can make you feel inferior withoutJeremy said:
your consent."
2. Muscle memory can be a hard taskmaster. It took me two years to stop
putting unnecessary semicolons at the end of one-line R statements.
My point is that if something works for you, keep doing it. If it
doesn't work for you, you might just find it tougher to change than you
expected.
M
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky
I do it all the time with Windows "GVim". It's faster for me toDavid said:
right-click on a humongous CSV file, "Edit in Vim", type
:g/Loopback/d
:wq
than it is for me to open up a CygWin window and do the same thing with
grep -v Loopback file.csv > edited-file.csv; mv edited-file.csv file.csv
or, since the CSV file is going into an RDB, ask a colleague to change
the query to filter out the Loopback.
Changing the query is the correct *long-term* answer, but when someone
wants the answer contained in that CSV file now and not when that
colleague comes back from vacation, it gets done with GVim. As I said in
another post, muscle memory can be a hard taskmaster sometimes.
Well, usually I don't need the ESC, and SHIFT-Z-Z is about 2.5
keypresses by my way of thinking.
I installed Eclipse once and was literally amazed at all the stuff it
can do. I wonder about a tool that is much more complex than the
artifacts one uses it to build, though.
Emacs co-evolved with Lisp and is ideally suited to the needs of Lisp
and Scheme programmers. Vi/Vim co-evolved with UNIX/Linux command line
toolsets, as did Perl originally, so is ideally suited to editing
configuration files and doing things with a file that require a little
more thinking than a canned "grep/awk/sed" command string, but less
programming than a Perl script. Eclipse co-evolved with enterprise Java
programming, so it's ideally suited to the needs of those programmers.
FreeRide, Mondrian and RadRails are, AFAIK, intended specifically to
co-evolve with the needs of Ruby/Rails programmers. Rubyists who use
other editors are probably stuck, as I am, in muscle memory.
C
Chad Perrin
Yeah, 'cause things never add up.
Yeah, 'cause there's only one edge case in the world.
Yeah, 'cause that's the only instance where Vim wins on keypresses.
Actually, the fact that Vim doesn't use Scheme is a major negative, for
my taste. Too bad. I still loathe the EMACS interface.
Hey, I just find all this OS vs. editor holy war stuff funny. If you
want to be offended, though, I can't stop you.
SciTE is most excellent, for when I'm "forced" to use a GUI editor.
Can't stand gedit and Kate, though.
Nothing else I've used enhances my productivity as much as Vim, though.
M
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky said:I installed Eclipse once and was literally amazed at all the stuff it
can do. I wonder about a tool that is much more complex than the
artifacts one uses it to build, though.
Just as a side note, I don't currently have Eclipse installed on my
Gentoo Linux "development workstation". So, I did an "emerge -pv
eclipse-sdk" to see what's involved, and edited the output file with Vim
...For those of you unfamiliar with Gentoo, that's *compressed* data,
source or binary, depending on the nature of the package. Most of the
time it's source, but that might well be different for Java.
Ah, but *nobody* uses boring stable old Eclipse 3.0.1 any more! How
about Eclipse 3.2?
Ruby may or may not nead an IDE, but does it nead an IDE *that* big?
Incidentally, I saw tools for C/C++ and Python go by when I searched the
repository for Eclipse, but I *didn't* see anything for Ruby! IIRC
RadRails is an Eclipse plugin. There's something vaguely disconcerting
about people who left Java web development bloatware for the lightness
and agility of Rails having a Rails IDE that plugs into Java web
development bloatware.
<ducking>
C
Chad Perrin
That would be me.
I just tend to prefer small tools that can be used together easily,
rather than big integrated toolsets like the all-singing, all-dancing
EmacsOS.
C
Chad Perrin
It's especially fun when someone using Esc+Meta+Alt+Ctrl+Shift makes fun
of GUI IDE users for the bloat of their software, then turns around and
declares the superiority of their own choice in comparison to Vim.
cake || eat
M
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky
Chad said:
Uh ... cake || eat? That's an *inclusive* or, isn't it?
Yeah ... having just made fun of Eclipse and admitting that I *should*
learn Emacs to be a "real programmer" but haven't moved beyond "vim"
because of 20 plus years of muscle memory, I wonder if I'm the pot or
the kettle.
I wonder if there's anything -- an OS, a language, an editor, a
programming philosophy -- for which we could get *everyone* on this list
to say, "<xxx> sucks!"
C
Chad Perrin
Uh ... cake || eat? That's an *inclusive* or, isn't it?
Good point.
!cake || !eat
Yeah ... having just made fun of Eclipse and admitting that I *should*
learn Emacs to be a "real programmer" but haven't moved beyond "vim"
because of 20 plus years of muscle memory, I wonder if I'm the pot or
the kettle.
I wanna be the skillet.
Windows ME?
H
Hal Fulton
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky said:Uh ... cake || eat? That's an *inclusive* or, isn't it?
Hmm, yeah... but it short-circuits, so if the first is true you
won't do the second... hmm.
Yeah ... having just made fun of Eclipse and admitting that I *should*
learn Emacs to be a "real programmer" but haven't moved beyond "vim"
because of 20 plus years of muscle memory, I wonder if I'm the pot or
the kettle.
I wonder if there's anything -- an OS, a language, an editor, a
programming philosophy -- for which we could get *everyone* on this list
to say, "<xxx> sucks!"
MSDOS, COBOL, notepad, static typing?
Hal
C
Chad Perrin
I take it you missed the earlier discussion re: static typing, in which
some concluded it isn't all bad.
H
Hal Fulton
Chad said:
I had a hard time filling in the last part, so I
put that partly for troll value.
I couldn't think of any paradigm that came before
"structured programming." GOTOful programming?
Unstructured programming?
Hal
C
Chad Perrin
How 'bout just GWBASIC?
M
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky
If you bought a new PC with Windows ME installed, or if you wiped aChad said:
machine clean and installed Windows ME on it, it was probably at least
usable. But an *upgrade* from Windows 98 SE to Windows ME pretty much
guaranteed an unusable system. I ended up throwing out Windows ME and
dual-booting the machine Windows 2000 Professional and Red Hat Linux 7.0.