it's called the web version of youtube... With full Youtube experience
So you've never tried it then. The mobile version. If you had, you wouldn't say anything this retarded. BTW, the HTML5 version works perfectly fine on Windows Phone, but that is not what this is about. This is about the request from MS to have an equivalent experience for Windows Phone that you get on Android and iOS, and Google saying "no, you can't".
Google are being assholes, the only loser is the consumer, and supporting such behavior on part of any company just shows how utterly retarded religious nutcases can get.
Bullshit. Microsoft is asking for permission (with the cooperation of Google) to create a YouTube app on Windows Phone that is similar to the apps that already exists for iOS and Android. Remember, the HTML5 version of youtube.com works fine on Windows Phone, has since it became available.
What Google is doing is saying: "No, since we don't like your company, you will never be allowed to write an app for YouTube. Ever. We are assholes, and we own YouTube, and we hate Microsoft, so you can go f*ck your self".
There is no difference between what Google is doing right now and what Microsoft was doing to Lotus 123 (DOS X ain't done until Lotus won't run, or whatever that was). Evil is evil. This time Google is the perpetrator and Microsoft is in fact the victim, or rather Microsoft customers. Google is attempting to use areas where it has a de-facto monopoly to shut out a competitor.
For the standard/. crowd this is fine when done by Google but not OK when done by Microsoft. Identical behavior. Just shows how utterly moronic the average/.er has gotten. I long for the days when there was actual intelligent conversation on/. but due to morons like this, those is not likely to return.
The funniest part is that you have absolutely no clue as to what you are yapping about. You are just opening and closing your mouth and the only thing that comes out is ignorant bullshit.
The HTML5 version of youtube works fine on Windows Phone. Has for as long as I have owned one. No problems. That is not what this is about.
Microsoft wants to have a YouTube app on Windows Phone. Similar to the one that is on Android or the one that is on iOS. The iOS and the Android versions are written in their native programming languages and have far more features than the HTML5 version of youtube.com. This makes them attractive options to youtube.com. Anyone who has, for example, used the iOS version of YouTube on an iPad would never consider using the browser version. For good reasons.
Microsoft wants to add the same experience on WinPhone, but what Google is saying is actually: "No, we don't like you. You are assholes. We will block anyone who uses your product from having a good experience with our product. There is no way you will get an Android equivalent onto your device. Nah, nah, nah, nah, nah.".
Open web is what Google is selling. Yeah. Open my ass. Google today is more evil than Microsoft was at its peak. Google needs, in the same way that Microsoft needed, regulators to come in and blast them to pieces. They are f*cking evil incarnate.
It would be better if you wrote, not out of dumb ignorance, but out of knowledge. The HTML5 version of YouTube works fine on Windows Phone. Has for ages. That is not what this is about, so next time you want to look retarded, try to gather some information first. Then you might fail (to look retarded that is).
Wow, you really have never programmed in your entire life, have you?
Can you explain how you would do a search and replace of let's say 3000 files for something like this (pseudo code looking a bit like Java/C#:
1/ You have Class1 with the method doStuff and Class2 with the method doStuff. So, in your code you have things like: var stuff = new Class1();
stuff.doStuff();
2/ then, in a completely different file, edited by another member of your team you have var stuff = new Class2();
stuff.doStuff()
3/ in yet another class you have var listOfStuff = getJunkFromStorage(); getJunkFromStorage returns a List<Class1> foreach( var item in listOfStuff ) {
item.doStuff();
}
4/ and some other place there is var listOfSomethingElse = getAllTheCoolStuffFromStorage(); this one returns a List<Class2> foreach( var item in listOfSomethingElse) {
item.doStuff();
}
Now refactor so that doStuff from Class1 becomes doStuffDifferently()
This means that in 1/ and 3/ stuff.doStuff() and item.doStuff() will become stuff.doStuffDifferently() and item.doStuffDifferently(), while in 2 and 4 nothing changes. In order to be able to do the correct search and replace, you have to know that getAllTheCoolStuffFromStorage() returns a list of Class2 and not a list of Class1. There may be many such functions returning lists of Class1, first you'd have to find them all, then you'd have to make a search and replace pattern that covers them all. How would you do that?
This is not a contrived example, it is what every single project of some complexity looks like. Class1() might be written by you, Class2 may be from a completely different development team. The code in which you have to do search and replace might have been worked on by four or five different teams that past decade. Class2 may be from a third party tool, and the third party tool maker has changed some method names that you are using all over the place (happens all the time, though it shouldn't).
I recently had to migrate a project using a 2003 version of a third party tool to their latest version since the 2003 release was incompatible with our new app container. Class paths and method names had changed all over the place. Fixing that with search and replace would have taken days, possibly weeks. The project, containing millions of lines of code, would have to be re-built regularly during the search and replace process since we'd have to use the build process to find many of the places where change was required. With good re-factoring we were up and running on the new app container before lunch. I just went back into the source repository to check how many files we changed that day and the number was a little above 75 000 files. Once up and running we used our unit and integration tests to make sure things were OK. Without proper tools like refactoring, code coverage analysis etc, we would released months later than we did. If you can do something like this with search and replace, I'd love to know how you put syntax knowledge into your search and replace tool.
Please, I'd love to see the documentation for that. The only thing I have found was a rumor of an outbreak in Jharkhand, India, but it turned out to be chickenpox.
To my knowledge, all outbreaks of smallpox the past few decades have resulted from researchers handling the virus in a lab setting.
And in this day and age, it is far more likely to die from a vaccine than it is to catch the disease in the first place
Someone who "reasons" in this way were eitther born stupid or or had parents hitting them over the head with hammers for the formative years of their life.
Therefore my child will take that risk
That is a logic that disqualifies you as a parent, and you should also be shunned by normal society since you are putting countless children at risk of dying. So far, Jenny McCarthy, and other anti-vaccination nuts are directly responsible for almost 1200 dead children in the US alone, and more than 10 000 children who got sick, many with long-term negative effects.
Compared the number of children who'd die from the disease., the number who die from the vaccine. Since there is no link between autism and vaccine, that means that only heavily moronic parents would not vaccinate their children, and morons who put their children at risk because they hold a nonsense belief should be disqualified as parents and their children removed from their care.
Yes, it is. Since the data shows no correlation between vaccination and autism, the hypothesis that vaccination leads to autism has been de-bunked. Not that it ever was a hypothesis even.
Sigh, are you retarded? Are you saying you have only worked on projects where a class is instantiated only once, or where every time the class is instantiated you use the same instance (variable) name?
Instances of a particular class may riddle the code base with thousands of instances, each with adifferent name. Please explain how you would do this? If you think there is only one instance of a class, or the instantiation of a class always happens with the same instance name, you have never developed software of more advanced complexity than "hello world".
Some things you may have to deal with
var inst = new JoeClass(); ...
var someOtherInst = new JoeClass();
var aList = new List() {
new JoeClass(someInitializer),
new JoeClass(someOtherInitializer),
new JoeClass(aThirdInitializer)
};
So, now you have do deal with:
inst.joe_method();
someOtherInst.joe_method();
foreach( var j in aLIst ) {
j.joe_method();
}
You also need to make sure you skip
var inst = new AnotherClass()
inst.joe_method();
So you are going to do that using regular expression? How do you change inst.joe_method in the first example, and not in the second, in the same code base. What would the expression be? How do you know that the first inst.joe_method() is a call on the class JoeClass, and that the second, identical line, is on another class that is not being refactored? When did regular expressions develop syntax awareness?
one would know that there is a multitude of personnel law that would dictate that you must have cause to terminate an employee
Seems like you assume that everybody who reads/. lives the same place you do. They do not. Some of them live in California, for example, where you have "at will" employment, where
any hiring is presumed to be "at will"; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals "for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all," and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work
Either way, you normally could not fire somebody for simply refusing to use an IDE
You might have heard about "Silicon Valley", lots of people work there who are skilled in various computer trickery. You could let an employee go simply for not liking the pitch of his voice (unless of course you told him, then it might be construed as discrimination). Since you do not have to give reason, most employers would not give reason, just terminate the employment.
Of course, maybe this situation took place outside the US, where different laws may be in effect.
I have no idea where this took place, nor do I know where you live, but only 1/3 of the US work force have some "just cause" protection, the other 2/3s can be terminated at any point in time for any, or no reason.
You can't use regular expressions to do refactoring. Simple as that. To do refactoring you need to understand the syntax of the language in question. Visual Studio uses the build tools to identify, for example, instances of a class. Compared to any kind of search and replace, refactoring in the IDE is several orders of magnitude better both in that it is more reliable but also a lot faster.
In complex enterprise products, a developer will be at least an order of magnitude more productive with an IDE than without. He can do things not possible outside of the IDE (such as effective refactoring) and the things he do will be less error prone and better structured. For the average enterprise app the time it takes to develop the app in the first place is more or less irrelevant, since enterprise apps are 10% development and 90% maintenance and enhancements. An IDE delivers in these areas, particularly when it is coupled with project, source management and documentation systems. Any developer giving up this type of productivity boosts is an idiot.
In addition to this, you of course have the same good stuff that you have, for example, in emacs with macros etc. Assuming I could write a class in C# (or Java) with no errors in typing and stuff, it would contain at least five times more characters than I had typed. I never type full class or variable names obviously, the IDE fills in most of it for me while I am typing. That alone is a huge time saver. Each time I create a new class with new methods, the IDE fills in the entire scaffolded documentation, which again is a huge time saver. When I implement an interface in a class, the IDE adds all the methods I need to implement, and it makes sure each throws a good exception by default. The IDE saves me thousands of key-strokes every single week. It therefore even prevents CT.
Sigh. I develop on Windows and on Linux. I use Eclipse on Windows, Eclipse on Linux and VS on Windows. The first thing I install on any PC is Cygwin, since "find . -name -exec {} +" is in my spine. By far the fastest and most efficient way to make quick changes to (for example) config files is using vim. I can't even use "dir" since I have no clue what its command line options are but "ls" (aliased to ls --color=tyy -F) again in my spinal repertoire and has been since I started using SunOS (that one before Solaris) some time back when your mommy and daddy went on their first date and you were just a vague potential in his pants. I probably have longer time developing enterprise software deployed on Linux than you have out of your diapers. I was also part of one of the very first teams to develop enterprise software in Java deployed to some of the largest companies in the world. We were so early doing commercial Java enterprise software that Sun had our company name in their very first New York Times ads.
That doesn't change the fact that what you complained about would indicate you are a total moron, or even worse, one of those retards who have a religious relationship with something as stupid as an operating system and you think Linux can walk on water and Microsoft is evil. Here is a clue for you, they are both far from ideal, but archtecturally Windows is slightly ahead of Linux, but neither can hold a candle to things like QNX. However, on one point, Windows is, with a huge margin, the very best Operating System out there. It has apps. I can manage and do most of the "post" work needed on my extensive (and growing) collection of images (shot in RAW) in Lightroom, Linux has nothing that comes close. On some I can do the very last touch-ups in Photoshop, Linux has nothing that comes close enough (no, GiMP is not it. I assure you. It isn't.)
Oh, and on my PC, Visual Studio has 43 templates, arranged nicely by category, the largest category has 11 templates. When starting a new project I assume you know whether you want to write a web application, an Android application or a Windows application. Only one of which has more than ten templates. If you can't get your head around that, your software development skills are the least of your problems. Then I'd recommend you go see a doctor. Ten is a far cry from your stupid 300K nonsense.
That's not the point. The point is in the moron refusing it. Presumably, in this situation, we are not talking about developing software that has an extremely limited code-base, something that can be both managed, refactored, tested easily. A few thousand lines of code at the most. For that, sure, an IDE is probably not needed, for anything with a complexity above that, an IDE is not only needed to make things easier, it will ensure you make things both better and less error prone. The IDE is not about editing code, never was. The IDE is about editing, ensuring quality, re-factoring etc. All stuff that is not possible to do with command-line tools with the same quality assured. It simply isn't, no matter what people think.
A developer actively refusing this is a moron, no matter what he is doing. He's going to make more mistakes than the others on the team, guaranteed. He's going to produce less testable and less maintainable code. He needs to be fired.
Please explain to the ones who are not incompetent how this has any effect on the instances of the Joe class.
For example, how would it fare on:
Joe anInstance = new Joe();
AnotherJoe instance2 = new AnotherJoe();
anInstance.joe_method();
instance2.joe_method();
The result should be:
Joe anInstance = new Joe();
AnotherJoe instance2 = new AnotherJoe();
anInstance.joe_method2();
instance2.joe_method();
Rubbish. Make today is useless for anything but trivial stuff. Sure, make is good for older stuff, but you should look at alternatives that are much better. Even Ant is a generation or two more useful than make.
I don't think you should work with computers. It seems like the simplest things confounds you. Try becoming a bus driver instead.
To your "points":
1 - Start new project, chose the category I need (Web, Office, Windows, Android)
2 - Use the specific template I want.
Your 1. (b) - there are Empty, ASP.NET Webforms, and MVC apps. If you don't know the difference, why the f*ck are you looking at them?
Your 1. (c) - Sorry, there is no "Empty Project", but there is "Blank Solution". Works no problem.
Your 1. (d) - Good idea, find something that doesn't require much intellectual skills, you clearly are lacking in that area.
A lot of bugginess in Eclipse is caused by plugins. They work some times, other times they do not. Some times they are just massive areas of pain.
I was working on and off on a project running on jBoss that used the Smooks XML to Java thingy. The dev environment (which I did not set up and was not allowed to change) used a Smooks plugin for Eclipse. Besides the fact that Smooks would don random terrible things to applications, that Smooks plugin was the bane of my existence. The Smooks XML files were all hand "coded" in XML since the plugin did such a poor job of creating readable XML, mostly, when you let the smooks plugin do the XML, it would not build. So I learned how to hate Smooks.
To open the file in the Eclipse XML editor, you had to right-click on it and specify to open in XML editor. Some times you'd forget and just double-click. That's when it got funny. The Smooks editor would open, you'd go "sh*t", and then close the file before the Smooks plugin could do any harm to your fine-tuned, hand "coded" XML file. Too late. In all its wisdom, the Smooks editor plugin would not only read your XML file into memory, it would, upon reading it conclude that "oh, that fine, functional, fully working hand-"coded" XML is all well and good, but mine is much better", so it would on opening your file also save it back using its own (plugin) way and format, and whoops, Smooks would no longer accept the file. Back to the repository and check it out again.
Yes, seriously, the Smooks plugin would open the file and without any shame, re-format it and save it back (overwriting the original) to disk without even asking you.
Yeah, but that is not the fault of Eclipse, but the default of the environment in which it is running. Also depending very much on many, many other things. This isn't entirely the fault of the apps in question...
At this stage in my life I don't make this mistake anymore, since I have been conditioned to avoid it through using Eclipse (and other stuff) on Linux and Sun before that. But the following is standard behavior for me on Windows. It always works as expected on Windows, not so on Linux (many thanks X):
Select some text in (for example) Eclipse. Press Ctrl+C. Change to the app you want to paste the text into. Select the text you want to replace. Press Ctrl+V. Nothing happens. Why? By selecting the text you want to replace, you've just "copied to clipboard" as Microsoft likes to call it. Back to Eclipse and repeat, but don't select text in target app before pasting.
Again, this may have changed for the better, I just make sure I never do this on *nix platforms.
Slashdot Mirror
it's called the web version of youtube... With full Youtube experience
So you've never tried it then. The mobile version. If you had, you wouldn't say anything this retarded. BTW, the HTML5 version works perfectly fine on Windows Phone, but that is not what this is about. This is about the request from MS to have an equivalent experience for Windows Phone that you get on Android and iOS, and Google saying "no, you can't".
Google are being assholes, the only loser is the consumer, and supporting such behavior on part of any company just shows how utterly retarded religious nutcases can get.
Microsoft are a bunch of hypocrites as ever
Bullshit. Microsoft is asking for permission (with the cooperation of Google) to create a YouTube app on Windows Phone that is similar to the apps that already exists for iOS and Android. Remember, the HTML5 version of youtube.com works fine on Windows Phone, has since it became available.
What Google is doing is saying: "No, since we don't like your company, you will never be allowed to write an app for YouTube. Ever. We are assholes, and we own YouTube, and we hate Microsoft, so you can go f*ck your self".
There is no difference between what Google is doing right now and what Microsoft was doing to Lotus 123 (DOS X ain't done until Lotus won't run, or whatever that was). Evil is evil. This time Google is the perpetrator and Microsoft is in fact the victim, or rather Microsoft customers. Google is attempting to use areas where it has a de-facto monopoly to shut out a competitor.
For the standard /. crowd this is fine when done by Google but not OK when done by Microsoft. Identical behavior. Just shows how utterly moronic the average /.er has gotten. I long for the days when there was actual intelligent conversation on /. but due to morons like this, those is not likely to return.
The funniest part is that you have absolutely no clue as to what you are yapping about. You are just opening and closing your mouth and the only thing that comes out is ignorant bullshit.
The HTML5 version of youtube works fine on Windows Phone. Has for as long as I have owned one. No problems. That is not what this is about.
Microsoft wants to have a YouTube app on Windows Phone. Similar to the one that is on Android or the one that is on iOS. The iOS and the Android versions are written in their native programming languages and have far more features than the HTML5 version of youtube.com. This makes them attractive options to youtube.com. Anyone who has, for example, used the iOS version of YouTube on an iPad would never consider using the browser version. For good reasons.
Microsoft wants to add the same experience on WinPhone, but what Google is saying is actually: "No, we don't like you. You are assholes. We will block anyone who uses your product from having a good experience with our product. There is no way you will get an Android equivalent onto your device. Nah, nah, nah, nah, nah.".
Open web is what Google is selling. Yeah. Open my ass. Google today is more evil than Microsoft was at its peak. Google needs, in the same way that Microsoft needed, regulators to come in and blast them to pieces. They are f*cking evil incarnate.
It would be better if you wrote, not out of dumb ignorance, but out of knowledge. The HTML5 version of YouTube works fine on Windows Phone. Has for ages. That is not what this is about, so next time you want to look retarded, try to gather some information first. Then you might fail (to look retarded that is).
They didn't.
Now we have had various ample proof that parts of the government are exceeding their power
Not from this incident. RTFA one more time (with the updates).
They didn't. It was the employer, owner of the computer, who'd called the cops after going through the employees computer.
or you could read TFA, and be just a little less dumb (which is unusual when reading something produced by a journalists)
Do you know of any country that is better? FYI, I'm in Europe, and the EU is worse than the US.
Wow, you really have never programmed in your entire life, have you?
Can you explain how you would do a search and replace of let's say 3000 files for something like this (pseudo code looking a bit like Java/C#:
1/ You have Class1 with the method doStuff and Class2 with the method doStuff. So, in your code you have things like:
var stuff = new Class1();
stuff.doStuff();
2/ then, in a completely different file, edited by another member of your team you have
var stuff = new Class2();
stuff.doStuff()
3/ in yet another class you have
var listOfStuff = getJunkFromStorage(); getJunkFromStorage returns a List<Class1>
foreach( var item in listOfStuff ) {
item.doStuff();
}
4/ and some other place there is
var listOfSomethingElse = getAllTheCoolStuffFromStorage(); this one returns a List<Class2>
foreach( var item in listOfSomethingElse) {
item.doStuff();
}
Now refactor so that doStuff from Class1 becomes doStuffDifferently()
This means that in 1/ and 3/ stuff.doStuff() and item.doStuff() will become stuff.doStuffDifferently() and item.doStuffDifferently(), while in 2 and 4 nothing changes. In order to be able to do the correct search and replace, you have to know that getAllTheCoolStuffFromStorage() returns a list of Class2 and not a list of Class1. There may be many such functions returning lists of Class1, first you'd have to find them all, then you'd have to make a search and replace pattern that covers them all. How would you do that?
This is not a contrived example, it is what every single project of some complexity looks like. Class1() might be written by you, Class2 may be from a completely different development team. The code in which you have to do search and replace might have been worked on by four or five different teams that past decade. Class2 may be from a third party tool, and the third party tool maker has changed some method names that you are using all over the place (happens all the time, though it shouldn't).
I recently had to migrate a project using a 2003 version of a third party tool to their latest version since the 2003 release was incompatible with our new app container. Class paths and method names had changed all over the place. Fixing that with search and replace would have taken days, possibly weeks. The project, containing millions of lines of code, would have to be re-built regularly during the search and replace process since we'd have to use the build process to find many of the places where change was required. With good re-factoring we were up and running on the new app container before lunch. I just went back into the source repository to check how many files we changed that day and the number was a little above 75 000 files. Once up and running we used our unit and integration tests to make sure things were OK. Without proper tools like refactoring, code coverage analysis etc, we would released months later than we did. If you can do something like this with search and replace, I'd love to know how you put syntax knowledge into your search and replace tool.
Please, I'd love to see the documentation for that. The only thing I have found was a rumor of an outbreak in Jharkhand, India, but it turned out to be chickenpox.
To my knowledge, all outbreaks of smallpox the past few decades have resulted from researchers handling the virus in a lab setting.
And in this day and age, it is far more likely to die from a vaccine than it is to catch the disease in the first place
Someone who "reasons" in this way were eitther born stupid or or had parents hitting them over the head with hammers for the formative years of their life.
Therefore my child will take that risk
That is a logic that disqualifies you as a parent, and you should also be shunned by normal society since you are putting countless children at risk of dying. So far, Jenny McCarthy, and other anti-vaccination nuts are directly responsible for almost 1200 dead children in the US alone, and more than 10 000 children who got sick, many with long-term negative effects.
Compared the number of children who'd die from the disease., the number who die from the vaccine. Since there is no link between autism and vaccine, that means that only heavily moronic parents would not vaccinate their children, and morons who put their children at risk because they hold a nonsense belief should be disqualified as parents and their children removed from their care.
Yes, it is. Since the data shows no correlation between vaccination and autism, the hypothesis that vaccination leads to autism has been de-bunked. Not that it ever was a hypothesis even.
Sigh, are you retarded? Are you saying you have only worked on projects where a class is instantiated only once, or where every time the class is instantiated you use the same instance (variable) name?
Instances of a particular class may riddle the code base with thousands of instances, each with adifferent name. Please explain how you would do this? If you think there is only one instance of a class, or the instantiation of a class always happens with the same instance name, you have never developed software of more advanced complexity than "hello world".
Some things you may have to deal with
...
var inst = new JoeClass();
var someOtherInst = new JoeClass();
var aList = new List() {
};
So, now you have do deal with:
inst.joe_method();
someOtherInst.joe_method();
foreach( var j in aLIst ) {
}
You also need to make sure you skip
var inst = new AnotherClass()
inst.joe_method();
So you are going to do that using regular expression? How do you change inst.joe_method in the first example, and not in the second, in the same code base. What would the expression be? How do you know that the first inst.joe_method() is a call on the class JoeClass, and that the second, identical line, is on another class that is not being refactored? When did regular expressions develop syntax awareness?
one would know that there is a multitude of personnel law that would dictate that you must have cause to terminate an employee
Seems like you assume that everybody who reads /. lives the same place you do. They do not. Some of them live in California, for example, where you have "at will" employment, where
any hiring is presumed to be "at will"; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals "for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all," and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work
Either way, you normally could not fire somebody for simply refusing to use an IDE
You might have heard about "Silicon Valley", lots of people work there who are skilled in various computer trickery. You could let an employee go simply for not liking the pitch of his voice (unless of course you told him, then it might be construed as discrimination). Since you do not have to give reason, most employers would not give reason, just terminate the employment.
Of course, maybe this situation took place outside the US, where different laws may be in effect.
I have no idea where this took place, nor do I know where you live, but only 1/3 of the US work force have some "just cause" protection, the other 2/3s can be terminated at any point in time for any, or no reason.
You can't use regular expressions to do refactoring. Simple as that. To do refactoring you need to understand the syntax of the language in question. Visual Studio uses the build tools to identify, for example, instances of a class. Compared to any kind of search and replace, refactoring in the IDE is several orders of magnitude better both in that it is more reliable but also a lot faster.
In complex enterprise products, a developer will be at least an order of magnitude more productive with an IDE than without. He can do things not possible outside of the IDE (such as effective refactoring) and the things he do will be less error prone and better structured. For the average enterprise app the time it takes to develop the app in the first place is more or less irrelevant, since enterprise apps are 10% development and 90% maintenance and enhancements. An IDE delivers in these areas, particularly when it is coupled with project, source management and documentation systems. Any developer giving up this type of productivity boosts is an idiot.
In addition to this, you of course have the same good stuff that you have, for example, in emacs with macros etc. Assuming I could write a class in C# (or Java) with no errors in typing and stuff, it would contain at least five times more characters than I had typed. I never type full class or variable names obviously, the IDE fills in most of it for me while I am typing. That alone is a huge time saver. Each time I create a new class with new methods, the IDE fills in the entire scaffolded documentation, which again is a huge time saver. When I implement an interface in a class, the IDE adds all the methods I need to implement, and it makes sure each throws a good exception by default. The IDE saves me thousands of key-strokes every single week. It therefore even prevents CT.
Sigh. I develop on Windows and on Linux. I use Eclipse on Windows, Eclipse on Linux and VS on Windows. The first thing I install on any PC is Cygwin, since "find . -name -exec {} +" is in my spine. By far the fastest and most efficient way to make quick changes to (for example) config files is using vim. I can't even use "dir" since I have no clue what its command line options are but "ls" (aliased to ls --color=tyy -F) again in my spinal repertoire and has been since I started using SunOS (that one before Solaris) some time back when your mommy and daddy went on their first date and you were just a vague potential in his pants. I probably have longer time developing enterprise software deployed on Linux than you have out of your diapers. I was also part of one of the very first teams to develop enterprise software in Java deployed to some of the largest companies in the world. We were so early doing commercial Java enterprise software that Sun had our company name in their very first New York Times ads.
That doesn't change the fact that what you complained about would indicate you are a total moron, or even worse, one of those retards who have a religious relationship with something as stupid as an operating system and you think Linux can walk on water and Microsoft is evil. Here is a clue for you, they are both far from ideal, but archtecturally Windows is slightly ahead of Linux, but neither can hold a candle to things like QNX. However, on one point, Windows is, with a huge margin, the very best Operating System out there. It has apps. I can manage and do most of the "post" work needed on my extensive (and growing) collection of images (shot in RAW) in Lightroom, Linux has nothing that comes close. On some I can do the very last touch-ups in Photoshop, Linux has nothing that comes close enough (no, GiMP is not it. I assure you. It isn't.)
Oh, and on my PC, Visual Studio has 43 templates, arranged nicely by category, the largest category has 11 templates. When starting a new project I assume you know whether you want to write a web application, an Android application or a Windows application. Only one of which has more than ten templates. If you can't get your head around that, your software development skills are the least of your problems. Then I'd recommend you go see a doctor. Ten is a far cry from your stupid 300K nonsense.
That's not the point. The point is in the moron refusing it. Presumably, in this situation, we are not talking about developing software that has an extremely limited code-base, something that can be both managed, refactored, tested easily. A few thousand lines of code at the most. For that, sure, an IDE is probably not needed, for anything with a complexity above that, an IDE is not only needed to make things easier, it will ensure you make things both better and less error prone. The IDE is not about editing code, never was. The IDE is about editing, ensuring quality, re-factoring etc. All stuff that is not possible to do with command-line tools with the same quality assured. It simply isn't, no matter what people think.
A developer actively refusing this is a moron, no matter what he is doing. He's going to make more mistakes than the others on the team, guaranteed. He's going to produce less testable and less maintainable code. He needs to be fired.
Please explain to the ones who are not incompetent how this has any effect on the instances of the Joe class.
For example, how would it fare on:
Joe anInstance = new Joe();
AnotherJoe instance2 = new AnotherJoe();
anInstance.joe_method();
instance2.joe_method();
The result should be:
Joe anInstance = new Joe();
AnotherJoe instance2 = new AnotherJoe();
anInstance.joe_method2();
instance2.joe_method();
Looking forward to the answer.
Express is a crippled product
Crippled? How? It doesn't support TFS, Plugins and remote debugging, but how is it otherwise crippled?
Also the Makefile is great for automated builds
Rubbish. Make today is useless for anything but trivial stuff. Sure, make is good for older stuff, but you should look at alternatives that are much better. Even Ant is a generation or two more useful than make.
I don't think you should work with computers. It seems like the simplest things confounds you. Try becoming a bus driver instead.
To your "points":
1 - Start new project, chose the category I need (Web, Office, Windows, Android)
2 - Use the specific template I want.
Your 1. (b) - there are Empty, ASP.NET Webforms, and MVC apps. If you don't know the difference, why the f*ck are you looking at them?
Your 1. (c) - Sorry, there is no "Empty Project", but there is "Blank Solution". Works no problem.
Your 1. (d) - Good idea, find something that doesn't require much intellectual skills, you clearly are lacking in that area.
A lot of bugginess in Eclipse is caused by plugins. They work some times, other times they do not. Some times they are just massive areas of pain.
I was working on and off on a project running on jBoss that used the Smooks XML to Java thingy. The dev environment (which I did not set up and was not allowed to change) used a Smooks plugin for Eclipse. Besides the fact that Smooks would don random terrible things to applications, that Smooks plugin was the bane of my existence. The Smooks XML files were all hand "coded" in XML since the plugin did such a poor job of creating readable XML, mostly, when you let the smooks plugin do the XML, it would not build. So I learned how to hate Smooks.
To open the file in the Eclipse XML editor, you had to right-click on it and specify to open in XML editor. Some times you'd forget and just double-click. That's when it got funny. The Smooks editor would open, you'd go "sh*t", and then close the file before the Smooks plugin could do any harm to your fine-tuned, hand "coded" XML file. Too late. In all its wisdom, the Smooks editor plugin would not only read your XML file into memory, it would, upon reading it conclude that "oh, that fine, functional, fully working hand-"coded" XML is all well and good, but mine is much better", so it would on opening your file also save it back using its own (plugin) way and format, and whoops, Smooks would no longer accept the file. Back to the repository and check it out again.
Yes, seriously, the Smooks plugin would open the file and without any shame, re-format it and save it back (overwriting the original) to disk without even asking you.
was it somehow borken
Yeah, but that is not the fault of Eclipse, but the default of the environment in which it is running. Also depending very much on many, many other things. This isn't entirely the fault of the apps in question...
At this stage in my life I don't make this mistake anymore, since I have been conditioned to avoid it through using Eclipse (and other stuff) on Linux and Sun before that. But the following is standard behavior for me on Windows. It always works as expected on Windows, not so on Linux (many thanks X):
Select some text in (for example) Eclipse. Press Ctrl+C. Change to the app you want to paste the text into. Select the text you want to replace. Press Ctrl+V. Nothing happens. Why? By selecting the text you want to replace, you've just "copied to clipboard" as Microsoft likes to call it. Back to Eclipse and repeat, but don't select text in target app before pasting.
Again, this may have changed for the better, I just make sure I never do this on *nix platforms.