Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Choosing the Right IDE

Posted by Soulskill on from the whichever-one-reminds-me-when-my-code-sucks dept.

Nerval's Lobster writes: Modern software development often requires working with multiple tools in a variety of languages. The complexity can give even the most skilled developer a nasty headache, which is why many try to rely on Integrated Development Environments (IDEs) to accomplish most of the work; in addition to source-code editors and automation, some even feature intelligent code completion. With so much choice out there, it's hard to settle on an IDE, so we interviewed several developers, who collectively offered up a list of useful questions to ask when evaluating a particular IDE for use. But do developers even need an IDE at all? When you go to smaller, newer developer shops, you're seeing a lot more standalone editors and command-line tools; depending on what you do, you might just need a good editor, and to master the command-line tools for the languages you use. What IDE do you prefer, if any, and why?

64 of 443 comments (clear)

  1. There can be only one. by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 5, Funny

    Emacs. Next question.

    --
    Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    1. Re:There can be only one. by bhcompy · · Score: 2

      That's not Borland 4.5

    2. Re:There can be only one. by g0tai · · Score: 5, Funny

      Sigh.

      You appear to be both wrong. :wq!

    3. Re:There can be only one. by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Longer answer: IDE? No thanks. At least, I've used Eclipse variants and various Visual Studios, but they map onto how I think about writing and managing software. I want a blank screen with lots of keyboard shortcuts, some basic autocompletion, perfect syntax highlighting, maybe some Git support, etc. I don't want code generation or any refactor-all-the-things functions; I won't be using them.

      I used Emacs for years and years, only eventually switching to Sublime Text. ST was beautiful and fast but didn't have nearly the ecosystem of Emacs, plus its non-Freeness started showing when it went many months without an update. Life's too short for a proprietary editor, which is where I spent approximately 60% of my work life. I dependent on it more than any other tool and the prospect of my chosen tool dying on the vine wasn't appealing. I tried Atom for about a week, but it was slower than ST2, lacked a broad ecosystem, and, well... JavaScript.

      So one day I decided to revisit Emacs. Hey! It grew a package manager! Since that afternoon, I've had zero desire to look back. Emacs will outlive me and my children, will support every new language and tool that comes along, and will always be Free. There's nothing out there good enough to make me consider switching.

      PS, in concession: I could make the same cases for Vim and its grandchildren. Once you've learned them, if they do what you need then there's very little compelling reason to change.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    4. Re:There can be only one. by sconeu · · Score: 2

      Great IDE. All it needs is a good programmer's editor.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    5. Re:There can be only one. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I want a blank screen with lots of keyboard shortcuts, some basic autocompletion, perfect syntax highlighting, maybe some Git support, etc.

      Sooooo... An IDE. Granted a lightweight one - but that's not "just an editor" anymore.

    6. Re:There can be only one. by alexhs · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually, it doesn't do exactly the same thing.
      :x writes only if the file has been modified (only the file's access time is updated).
      :wq writes unconditionnally (creates an empty file if it didn't exist, updates the file's modification time).

      --
      I have discovered a truly marvelous proof of killer sig, which this margin is too narrow to contain.
    7. Re: There can be only one. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Refactoring tools are very handy, if you know how to use them. For things more complicated than global-search-and-replace, there is really no substitute.

      I encourage you to go back to an IDE -- /any/ IDE -- and deliberately check-out the refactoring tools. You might be surprised at how effective they are, how much time they can save you, and how much it reduces otherwise error-prone hand-work.

    8. Re:There can be only one. by mattventura · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes. If you load up an editor enough, then the line between editor and IDE gets blurred. It's why I'd always start with an editor that is good at actually editing text, and build off of that, because that's usually easier than taking an IDE and trying to get it to edit text how you want. An IDE could make your breakfast and drive you to work but at the end of the day the main point is still to edit text.

    9. Re:There can be only one. by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "PS, in concession: I could make the same cases for Vim and its grandchildren. Once you've learned them, if they do what you need then there's very little compelling reason to change."

      Sound reasoning and pragmatism. Very nice. I use vim and joke about the vim vs. emacs debate all the time, but in truth I don't care which you are proficient with so long as it is with at least one of the two. If you can't use vim or emacs proficiently, I immediately start to question your competence. I'm not saying everyone who is unfamiliar with emacs or vim is incompetent, just that the likelihood rises quite a bit when the person can use neither well.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    10. Re:There can be only one. by jrumney · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The difference between Emacs and an IDE is that with Emacs, you can adapt it to the way you prefer to work. With an IDE you have to adapt the way you work to the IDE.

    11. Re: There can be only one. by GigaplexNZ · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Using Visual Studio 2013 here. The refactoring tools are near useless in our large C++ project. For example, using "Rename" on a member field called m_size will often rename m_size instances from other classes too. They intentionally dumbed down the "Find all references" feature as users complained it was too slow, and by default it now uses a text search based approach which isn't really any better than a dumb text editor. I find it's easier to just rename the m_size field in the class to m_size2, find all the build errors, then do a text replacement on m_size2, than it is to deal with the unreliable tools in Visual Studio.

    12. Re:There can be only one. by narcc · · Score: 2

      Indeed. I just wish it had a half-way decent editor.

      --
      Required reading for internet skeptics
    13. Re: There can be only one. by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 4, Interesting

      C++ is one of the toughest languages for tools to handle - it's crazy complicated even just to parse right. And in case of rename refactoring in particular (and anything else that might implicitly include that), it might not even be possible to do it right. Consider something like this:

      struct foo { int x; };
      struct bar { float x; };
      template<class T> void baz(T t) { t.x; }
      baz(foo());
      baz(bar());

      Now suppose you're asking the editor to rename foo::x to foo::y. Should it also update t.x in baz, since it's referencing foo::x in one of the instantiations? But if it does so, then the other instantiation, the one that takes bar, will stop working. Should it rename bar::x as well? But it's not really related to foo::x in any meaningful way, they just happen to be referenced by the same template.

    14. Re:There can be only one. by sabbede · · Score: 2
      WOAH!

      Did you sudo that? You could be about to lose your changes!!

    15. Re:There can be only one. by paulpach · · Score: 2

      I used emacs for years, and I invested weeks configuring it to work exactly the way I wanted. My .emacs was beautiful and people often copied it for themselves.

      Then I tried eclipse, and realized it already worked the way I wanted out of the box. Never looked back.

      It is not about how configurable the editor is. It is about writing code. If your editor helps you do that: great, if not, just try something else, don't get religious on it.

  2. emacs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    C-x-C-c

  3. Do most of the work? by avandesande · · Score: 5, Insightful

    IDE's don't do any of the work- they take care of the things aren't actually programming.

    --
    love is just extroverted narcissism
    1. Re:Do most of the work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Exactly. If you've never renamed a function in your life - then go ahead and code with an 'editor' alone. Otherwise pick a good IDE and enjoy the time you're not spending doing a search and replace.

    2. Re: Do most of the work? by pruss · · Score: 2

      Renaming a field or method of a class is more tricky with an editor, though, since other classes may have a field or method with the same name and you may not want to rename those.
      It's also nice not to have to remember or look up APIs, constant names, etc.

      As a teenager, I used Borland IDEs (mainly Turbo C). Then I spent over a decade mainly using commandline tools (C and assembly). But then since starting Android development some years ago, I've gotten to appreciate IDEs enough that now sometimes I even write LaTeX presentations and articles in Eclipse and short python scripts in Visual Studio. (If only loading time were faster.)

      Over my decade of commandline development, I also forgot how helpful a GUI debugger can be and only rediscovered it recently.

    3. Re:Do most of the work? by twistedcubic · · Score: 2


      Syntax highlighting and keeping track of start end end parenthesis is nice and all, but if you need it that is a good sign that your code isn't readable.

      But I program in Lisp, you insensitive clod!

    4. Re:Do most of the work? by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 2

      Your thinking of IPEs (Integrated Programming Environments - which as far as I know don't exist) not Integrated Development Environments. IDEs are helpful for development, of which programming is merely a subset. Unfortunately the industry is flooded with people who don't know the difference:

      How long have you been coding? 7 Days you say? When did you start the project? 7 Days ago? Seriously?

      Yes, alas, there are a lot of people who think that development starts with writing code. It doesn't. If you are doing it that way, you are doing it wrong :-(

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    5. Re: Do most of the work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you use your brain for a sec, there are many reasons one would need to change function names. I honestly question your ability if you can't grasp this.

    6. Re:Do most of the work? by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      You sound like the guy next door to me in the nursing home. Let's stop posting and go so we can still grab the best seats for Murder She Wrote.

    7. Re: Do most of the work? by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Functions are named in human readable ways, and are designed to reflect the function they perform. If that functionality changes, then it makes sense that the function name has to change as well. Leaving a function name alone when it's functionality change is terrible programming practice, because the name is now actively misleading anyone who uses the function or reads code that uses it. There may be other considerations as well, such as the name simply doesn't match the style of naming conventions elsewhere in the project. People make mistakes, and code often has to be reworked or refactored.

      True, it's not something that happens often enough (at least to me) that it would affect my productivity if I didn't have automatic renaming tools, but it's not like this is some new-fangled fad. I'm pretty sure you can find some advice on good naming conventions in "Code Complete", published a few decades ago.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    8. Re: Do most of the work? by holostarr · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You have a class which was originally written by someone else which is doing too much or is not following single responsibility principal, so you refactor out the pieces into other methods and classes, you then find method and variable names no longer reflect what the original method was doing and requires update. Or simply because you felt like it and using an IDE you fucking can! Seriously IDEs are great! I don't understand people on Slashdot who think if its not hard, its not worthy! IDEs provide so many benefits I would not be able to list them all. Here are some: - Intellisense sorting and cleaning of unused of import/using statements - Jumping to declaration of a method or variable - Hover over variable to see type - Debugging and stepping through code with ability to add/remove breakpoints on a whim - Hover over variable during debug to inspect its value - Watch variables - Edit conditional breakpoints quickly - Add bookmarks to code and jump between them - Highlight code errors and jump to them quickly - Compare code side by side - Show code smells - Run/debug test cases with a single click - Code completion for those hard to type/remember method names

    9. Re: Do most of the work? by euroq · · Score: 2

      To name it correctly.

      --
      Just because the U.S. is a republic does not mean it is not a democracy. Democracy/republic are not mutually exclusive.
    10. Re:Do most of the work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What are you talking about? An IDE doesn't force you to not use the command line. If you don't like the build system in the IDE, do it on the command line. Most IDEs, including Eclipse, let you run arbitrary commands within the IDE but you can always go outside the IDE. I've never seen an IDE that couldn't handle an external program writing to a file. The IDE just says "Hey this file changed, do you want the changes?"

      People are missing some of the best points of IDEs and instead are focusing on rarer tasks like renaming. IDEs auto import the things you need when you need them. They inline documentation on whatever function you're calling or whatever variable you're using. They auto-generate your function docs so you don't have to write a bunch of @param or whatever you language uses. They'll tell you you're typing a bug before you finish typing it. They spell check your variable names and strings. They'll automatically reformat the code to whatever the team specification is when you save or commit and reformat it back to your format whenever you need.

      Depending on how you use Emacs, it is an IDE. A lot of people claim they don't like IDEs when they've actually created one out of the tools they're using.

  4. Fuck you dice by binarylarry · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is a fucking microsoft ad.

    --
    Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    1. Re:Fuck you dice by binarylarry · · Score: 2

      Naturally.

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    2. Re:Fuck you dice by phantomfive · · Score: 2

      Says someone who hasn't used Visual Studio since the late 90s

      Or someone who's discovered the recent 'innovation' of Nuget. That thing is a monstrosity.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  5. Just be productive.. by MegOnWheels · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Use whatever makes you most productive and understand that it will vary from developer to developer. 99% of IDE / Editor debates make stuff all difference to the outcome. Instead focus on:1. Only implementing exactly what you need. 2 Testing the thing, then going back and reviewing the testing with a view to adding more tests. 3. Not let the implementation get ahead of the tests. 5. Get someone else to test. 6 .. Test.
    Test.. test .. test

  6. "Nerval's Lobster writes: " by ardmhacha · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Nerval's Lobster writes: "

    I'll bet it is a Dice article.

  7. Re:Only one and it's vi not emacs. sorry by lsllll · · Score: 3, Informative

    Back in the days I used to use Windows I used PFE, a multi window editor. For the past 14 or so year I have been using Linux and Kate is my favorite editor now. Does syntax highlighting, tabs vs. spaces, tiled views, profiles for project management, and allows multiple windows on multiple monitors. I'm not sure what more I can ask an editor. It's funny how some of us make the editor our "IDE" and do everything else on the command line like you say.

    --
    Is that a roll of dimes in your pocket or are you happy to see me?
  8. Still use the most productive IDE by bdhall1313 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Delphi. There is still nothing better.

    1. Re:Still use the most productive IDE by Ronin+Developer · · Score: 3, Informative

      I would agree with you as I prefer Delphi for my personal work or for prototyping a solution. Others here couldn't give a rats ass about a tool they consider obsolete.

      As for IDE vs CLI? I prefer IDE. Others a text editor with, maybe, syntax highlighting. More power to them.
      A good IDE brings everything together, such a code, device views, active debugging, compiler, UML design tools, etc., into a single environment. Managing things such as refactoring, unit testing, code analysis, documentation and other tasks is a big help.

      I will not argue with those who prefer CLIs as some people are simply more efficient with the CLI over an IDE. Personally, I would give those in my shop the option to use alternative tools provided the code is properly written, bug free and able to be used, with ease, with the selected IDE.

      I do require a lot of screen real estate regardless. One can never have too much screen real estate when debugging when using a text editor or IDE.

      My favorite IDEs?
      Java - IntelliJ (from JetBrains)
      PHP - PHPStorm (derived from IntelliJ)
      Android - Android Studio (derived from IntelliJ)
      iOS/Mac - XCode, RemObject Silver (debate is out) and AppCode (derived from IntelliJ).

      For cross platform, prototyping and personal work, I prefer Delphi / RADStudio with VisualParadigm for real UML work.

    2. Re:Still use the most productive IDE by tshawkins · · Score: 2

      +1

      I also use cLion (based on Intelij) for c/c++,

    3. Re:Still use the most productive IDE by shihonage · · Score: 2

      It's nice to finally meet the other Delphi programmer.

  9. Nothing to see here. Move along. by grimmjeeper · · Score: 2

    I guarantee that you're not going to find good advice about what IDE is best on a Dice "insights" clickbait page.

  10. Re:Only one and it's vi not emacs. sorry by techno-vampire · · Score: 2

    Fi on vi, I say, fi! If I must use a CLI editor, I use Mork's editor, nano. Not only is it a full-screen editor (We all know that vi was designed to be used with a teletype as an input device and never outgrew its limitations.) it has the most important editing commands at the bottom of the screen, including the all-important ^G that brings up the rest of the program's help. IMAO, the only reason for anybody to learn such a user-hostile "editor" as vi is for the bragging rights of having done so, and the only reason to continue using it once you've mastered it is masochism, pure and simple.

    --
    Good, inexpensive web hosting
  11. As long as you consider one... by ndykman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Moving past a text editor is a big help. Sure, it's good to understand the command line and all that, but having a tool that understands code and allows you to manipulate it is really useful. Refactoring support matters. A lot, actually. Safe delete, rename, extract method/parameter/etc. are all basic tools that can make a code base better. Code completion (intellsense, etc) support matters too. What does this thing do. Does it do what I think it should? Why or why not. Add in things like smart templates, etc. and even the most code aware text editors just look like nothing more than keyword colorers.

    Personally, I can't recommend Visual Studio/Resharper or the IntelliJ product line enough. Worth every single penny and then some. JetBrains has a laser like focus on just getting things done. High DPI support was a problem for their IDEs, so instead of waiting on Java 8/2D to catch up, they forked it just to get it work, and they admitted it was not a great solution, but a workaround.

    1. Re:As long as you consider one... by NoKaOi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Code completion (intellsense, etc) support matters too. What does this thing do. Does it do what I think it should? Why or why not.

      Any code base that can't be understood without Intellisense is broken. If you need auto-complete to answer those questions, then you are programming wrong (as an antidote I suggest getting rid of your IDE until you learn to do it right).

      Oh, get off your high horse and stop being so arrogant. I don't think he said he needed it to understand the code. It matters to some people simply because they find it faster to use, not necessarily because they aren't capable without it. I, personally, think code completion is annoying, but I fully recognize that for some people it's great. If somebody likes it, then they should look at IDE's that have it. If somebody doesn't like it, then it's not a factor - they can use a tool without it, and I think pretty much any tool with it has an option to disable it.

  12. Wrong question by msobkow · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The question is: "What language are you writing this project in?"

    The language dictates the best IDE for the job.

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    1. Re:Wrong question by grimmjeeper · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not just what language but "What is your target environment?" That makes a big difference too.

  13. Can I turn features off? by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 4, Interesting

    One question I always ask when evaluating a new whizz-bang high sparkle product is: can I turn the features off?

    If you use more than one application in your development, you're always bumping into interface inconsistencies. Having to stop and look at the result of what you typed is annoying, time consuming and distracting.

    I can type <tab> really, *really* fast, so it makes absolutely no sense to try to overcomplicate things by having the editor try to do some sort of indentation for me - it only means that I have to stop and look every time, and I can't get used to the feature because no other application does it the same way.

    For emacs in particular, all the various "electric $LANG" modes have different ideas of which characters are electric, what their behaviour is, and what coding style I should be using. Selecting a coding style to use is about 2 hours of internet search, editing the profile, restarting, and testing. (And that's if you're using one of the approved styles, otherwise you're either stuck or forced to learn lisp. *shudder*)

    (And for the record, turning off electric-mode in emacs is wildly difficult to actually do. One pitfall example: having "save state" turned on will override the profile file, leaving you wondering why the profile command from the online tutorial didn't work.)

    You can't get used to it, you can't develop muscle memory or take your eyes off the screen because the minute you switch to something else (the browser, E-mail client, putty terminal, LibreOffice or anything else), muscle memory results in errors.

    Lots of applications have these inconsistencies. Clicking in a text editor will place the cursor where the mouse is, while clicking on the address bar in the browser *selects* the line and places the cursor at the end. It takes 1 click to insert text normally, it takes 3 clicks to insert into the address bar. Muscles don't remember that.

    People spend an inordinate amount of time fumbling the interface without actually thinking about it. Your "rich, user experience" isn't warranted and reduces efficiency.

    Just give me a simple, direct interface.

    1. Re:Can I turn features off? by FranTaylor · · Score: 2

      And for the record, turning off electric-mode in emacs is wildly difficult to actually do.

      Can you follow along?

      - click on the "C" menu
      - mouse over the "Toggle" item
      - click on the "Electric Mode" item

      Is this really so wildly difficult?

  14. Depends on the Language by Maltheus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If the langugage is Java (or even Python to a lesser degree), then I haven't come across anything that even comes close to IntelliJ. It's code completion and introspection are so good, that I find I don't need to test as often. And I rarely find any issues when I do.

    I also use Eclipse and Netbeans, and everything seems to take an extra step or two and that really adds up, over time. Netbeans is good for C++ though, so I muddle through with it.

  15. Syntax hilighting by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Insightful

    According to the article: "Some people love syntax highlighting; others hate it with the fiery passion of a thousand suns."

    Is that really true? I've never met someone who hated syntax hilighting.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    1. Re:Syntax hilighting by BasilBrush · · Score: 2

      This is slashdot, there will always be someone who'll declare they prefer something primitive rather than something more modern and useful.

    2. Re:Syntax hilighting by Whiteox · · Score: 2

      Ever meet a COBOL Report programmer? He was employed till ~2005 when he retired of old age. He never had a personal computer either. He would go to work, write code on a terminal to output a custom report (Banking btw), then go home to lead an ordinary life. He was paid well and in demand but knew nothing about any other programming languages, IDE or anything else. Just one skill set and that's it.

      --
      Don't be apathetic. Procrastinate!
    3. Re:Syntax hilighting by Necron69 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Those of us who are colorblind often struggle with the default colors used in syntax highlighting. If you can (or bother to) adjust those, it can work, but colorized syntax highlighting on a white background can often be near invisible to me. It doesn't highlight at all, it HIDES the code.

      Necron69

      ps. Colorized 'ls' - red on black? Are you out of your f*cking mind!?

  16. If I use an IDE, does it mean I'm a bad programmer by mark-t · · Score: 4, Insightful

    While I have coded without an IDE in the past, and I still do it occasionally for one-off throwaway programs, when it comes to larger projects, I do find that having an IDE dramatically boosts my productivity. All of the things I do with an IDE could theoretically also be done with vi and an appropriate suite of tools, but for myself, the point of using an IDE is to really just have it all bundled in as one, and not have to switch to a different window just to show a call graph or function definition for what is at the current cursor, for example, when a simple hover-window can do the same thing, and since the window disappears as soon as I start typing or otherwise navigating, I don't even need to switch windows again when I resume editing.

    --
    File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
  17. A Computer by OrangeTide · · Score: 3, Funny

    My favorite IDE is a computer. When I wrote programs without a computer it was much harder. (I wish I was joking)

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  18. Anyone use Joe anymore? by Ramley · · Score: 3, Informative

    Joe's Own Editor. I don't use a traditional IDE, but do still use JOE. Am I alone with this? *sigh*

  19. Obviously.. by juanfgs · · Score: 5, Funny

    When I log into my Xenix system with my 110 baud teletype, both vi *and* Emacs are just too damn slow. They print useless messages like, 'C-h for help' and '"foo" File is read only'. So I use the editor that doesn't waste my VALUABLE time.

    Ed, man! !man ed

    ED(1) UNIX Programmer's Manual ED(1)

    NAME
              ed - text editor

    SYNOPSIS
              ed [ - ] [ -x ] [ name ]
    DESCRIPTION
              Ed is the standard text editor.
    ---

    Computer Scientists love ed, not just because it comes first alphabetically, but because it's the standard. Everyone else loves ed because it's ED!

    "Ed is the standard text editor."

    And ed doesn't waste space on my Timex Sinclair. Just look:

    -rwxr-xr-x 1 root 24 Oct 29 1929 /bin/ed
    -rwxr-xr-t 4 root 1310720 Jan 1 1970 /usr/ucb/vi
    -rwxr-xr-x 1 root 5.89824e37 Oct 22 1990 /usr/bin/emacs

    Of course, on the system *I* administrate, vi is symlinked to ed. Emacs has been replaced by a shell script which 1) Generates a syslog message at level LOG_EMERG; 2) reduces the user's disk quota by 100K; and 3) RUNS ED!!!!!!

    "Ed is the standard text editor."

    Let's look at a typical novice's session with the mighty ed:

    golem> ed
    ?
    help
    ?
    ?
    ?
    quit
    ?
    exit
    ?
    bye
    ?
    hello?
    ?
    eat flaming death
    ?
    ^C
    ?
    ^C
    ?
    ^D
    ?

    ---
    Note the consistent user interface and error reportage. Ed is generous enough to flag errors, yet prudent enough not to overwhelm the novice with verbosity.

    "Ed is the standard text editor."

    Ed, the greatest WYGIWYG editor of all.

    ED IS THE TRUE PATH TO NIRVANA! ED HAS BEEN THE CHOICE OF EDUCATED AND IGNORANT ALIKE FOR CENTURIES! ED WILL NOT CORRUPT YOUR PRECIOUS BODILY FLUIDS!! ED IS THE STANDARD TEXT EDITOR! ED MAKES THE SUN SHINE AND THE BIRDS SING AND THE GRASS GREEN!!

    When I use an editor, I don't want eight extra KILOBYTES of worthless help screens and cursor positioning code! I just want an EDitor!! Not a "viitor". Not a "emacsitor". Those aren't even WORDS!!!! ED! ED! ED IS THE STANDARD!!!

    TEXT EDITOR.

    When IBM, in its ever-present omnipotence, needed to base their "edlin" on a UNIX standard, did they mimic vi? No. Emacs? Surely you jest. They chose the most karmic editor of all. The standard.

    Ed is for those who can *remember* what they are working on. If you are an idiot, you should use Emacs. If you are an Emacs, you should not be vi. If you use ED, you are on THE PATH TO REDEMPTION. THE SO-CALLED "VISUAL" EDITORS HAVE BEEN PLACED HERE BY ED TO TEMPT THE FAITHLESS. DO NOT GIVE IN!!! THE MIGHTY ED HAS SPOKEN!!!

  20. I'm not a "coder", so.... by Noble713 · · Score: 2

    In the past few years I've largely use Eclipse. I tend to write small programs in C, C++, or CUDA C. I like Eclipse because it's free, has easy support for all these languages and others that I expect to use (Python, Java), runs on Debian/Ubuntu/etc., and there's tons of support online.

  21. Eclipse by X10 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So far I used Eclipse for Android development, but that's coming to an end. Google forces me to use Android Studio, which is terrible. Which makes me think: how can so many developers prefer AS over Eclipse? What does that say about developers? About me?

    --
    no, I don't have a sig
    1. Re:Eclipse by Miamicanes · · Score: 2

      Android Studio beats Eclipse for Android development like an unloved child in a trailer park.

      Seriously. Night-and-day improvement. No more times when you have to cut something into the clipboard, save the empty file, and paste it back to make Eclipse realize that it's imagining all the errors it thinks were in it. No more "type a semicolon, then have the cursor inexplicably move back so that the carriage return a moment later pushes the semicolon to the next line and breaks the code." No more situations where the IDE forgets what R.java is, where it came from, or how to regenerate it.

      Just make sure you use the official Google version of Android Studio, and NOT IntelliJ. As I mentioned in an earlier post, IntelliJ 14 with the Jetbrains Android plugin is neither directly-equivalent nor a consequence-free superset of Android Studio.

  22. de gustibus non est disputandem by FranTaylor · · Score: 4, Insightful

    you can argue all day about whether chocolate ice cream is better than vanilla and there is really no possible way that anything interesting will result from the conversation

  23. Re:If I use an IDE, does it mean I'm a bad program by BasilBrush · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No, using an IDE means you are a productive programmer. I swear most of these vi/emacs hipsters are still students or are unemployed.

  24. Re:GNU/Emacs on any platform by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 2

    Bullshit. vim is an equivalent tool to emacs (except it has a decent editor :-)

    Saying emacs is by far the beat option available is stupid. It would be equally stupid to say the same about vim. Both vim and emacs are similar, and you would never get "laughed off this forum" for using vim rather than emacs. While we always joke about which is better, you'd have to be a moron to believe that emacs is far better than vim, or vice versa.

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  25. Re:GNU/Emacs on any platform by Ulric · · Score: 2

    As vi/vim usually comes with the base OS by default (especially Unix - i.e. non-Linux - systems), knowing both editors (as I do) is preferable. For most programming work or complicated file edits, I generally use emacs though - since the late 1980s - my current .emacs config file is from 1990 - and, yes, I'm old.

    That's exactly why I switched to vi (not vim at that time) in 1995 after using Emacs exclusively since the 80s: I knew it would be available everywhere. I still use Emacs occasionally. I'm 50, that's not old.

  26. Re:If I use an IDE, does it mean I'm a bad program by BasilBrush · · Score: 2

    Go on then. Demonstrate it.

  27. Best IDE for OS development by sclark46 · · Score: 2

    I wonder what IDE the developers of MS Windows use? I wonder what IDE Linux kernel developers use. Which one is more robust?