Slashdot Mirror
Programming Tools You've Used?
crazy_speeder asks: "I'm looking for programming tools for the whole development cycle, including documentation. The project I'm working on will use C++ and Java. What has been your experience using tools like C++ Builder, Netbeans, Eclipse, JBuilder, Doxygen, ClearQuest, Rational Rose, g++, and any compiler, debugger, or IDE that you may have used. I need tools that will handle auto documentation, unit testing, design, file editing, and the like. As far as platform goes, Linux is the target OS while Linux or Solaris will be the host OS."
I know this doesn't answer your question directly, but while I certainly understand that there are "auto documentation" tools, and such available, learning to write your own, comprehensive, thought-out documentation is a very valuable skill that most don't have. Don't rely completely on automated processes. Somewhere along the line, you will find yourself having to hack out code in a text editor, or use a less-than-top-of-the-line development environment, at which point you will have to fall back on your own skills and not those of an auto-documentation program.
Finding a complete and comprehensive development environment is definitely an ideal situation, but don't neglect your knowledge and skill by using it as a crutch.
My mom always said, "Jim, you're 1 in a million." Given the current population, there are 7000 of me. God help us all!
boost also has a nice unit testing library. I use it for all my C++ code.
Use Netbeans. It has recently leapfrogged Eclipse in many areas (not to say that won't change) and the guys I work with say it is faster than Eclipse now in addition to the Refactoring, Swing Builder, etc. that it has.
The new 4.0 and 4.1 releases use ANT build files for all of their project information. They build and run JUnit tests as part of the project and the build process, and they come with a sweet profiler that even allows you to profile remotely. One of the neat things about the ANT based projects is anything that can use an ANT build script can build your project -- whether it be ANT itself, CruiseControl, Maven, Eclipse, etc.
The latest beta of 4.1 will even import Eclipse projects.
Also recently voted Developer.com Product of the Year 2005
Those who open their minds too far often let their brains fall out.
Axis
Jakarta commons, Spring, Hibernate
NetBeans (only if doing massive Java web app or Swing UI), Eclipse (good all around; web features castrated by IBM now trying to re-attach)
CVS and CVS client inside IDE. Other Linux clients IMHO have issues.
Junit
Ant, Ant and Ant everything via Ant
CruiseControl
Some form of Wiki
Poseidon / Argo UML
JIRA or equivalent
IMHO, deserve to stay away from:
JBuilder
Oracle Jdeveloper
IBM WSAD and other minions
Portal frameworks (maybe Liferay is ok)
Keep the project simple and bare bones. I wouldn't try and lock any of your developers into specific tools. CVS, Ant (because you're doing Java too), JavaDoc/Doxygen, any IDE should be able to integrate with these.
The project I'm on does not require any specific IDE at all. We've got guys running Emacs, I'm a vim user, another uses NetBeans, a few more Eclipse, and somebody has their personally licensed copy of JBuilder out here too.
The only issue have is when developers sometimes setup their IDEs to use different tabs sizes (we say they're 2 spaces, but people forget sometimes) and when some IDEs reformat a whole class on you, which makes the CVS diffs difficult to apply to different branches for fast-tracked bug fixes.
Yeah, eat this, all you VI fans! ;-)
;-)
Seriously, while newer-generation IDEs might be better for Java/C/C++, the cool thing about Emacs is that it has modes for all languages known to man, and then some. So if you just code in Java/C/C++ -- pick up an IDE, but if you do not know what life will send your way tomorrow -- start customizng your Emacs.
And of course good luck editing LaTeX docs in Eclipse!
Paul B.
and the right methodology for the job.
This is not to criticize your choice of tools. Personally, it's close to what I use, except I use ant for building. But I've found time and time again that people on my team struggle with one or other part of the tools chosen. When I've looked at the problem, it is usually that they are struggling against the presumed methodoloy presumed by those tools.
For example, cvs or subversion have a concurrent editing model that goes nicely with agile methodologies. Agile methodologies are the engineering equivalent of keeping your room picked up as you go along rather than letting the crap pile up waist deep and then dealing with the problem.
But agile might not be the kind of methodology you choose, for (occasionally) good or (usually) bad reasons. if it isn't, cvs will probably multiply your problems painfully.
With CVS, people work on what they think they need to work on, then deal with the fact that this might conflict with somebody else's idea of what needs to get done. The process is that you update from your repository, resolve any conflicts that arise, and then commit the resolved changes back. You do this every day, if not multiple times per day. It's the equivalent of keeping your room picked up. The problem is, this process doesn't seem like much fun at the outset. Actually, when you work this way, it is pretty enjoyable, but if you let things go, say not committing for a few days, you are punished. I've had people working for me who found this excessively time consuming and restrictive. The problem was they weren't doing it enough. You have to have real commitment to continual integration for cvs to work.
So, if you're not commited to continually integrating your work, and not stressing collective code ownership, then maybe cvs is not the tool for you. You may want a tool that supports locking on checkout.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Of course we know that Lisp is the only language worth coding in! ;-)
"A guy on Slashdot" even made it to Paul Graham's collection of Lisp quotes:
"I have heard more than one LISP advocate state such subjective comments as, "LISP is the most powerful and elegant programming language in the world" and expect such comments to be taken as objective truth. I have never heard a Java, C++, C, Perl, or Python advocate make the same claim about their own language of choice."
- A guy on Slashdot. What theory fits this data?