On Sunday, 27 August 2017 at 10:05:29 UTC, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
> So I will be doing a workshop on programming for the biology department at my university and I was wondering what would best suit the users.
>
> The following are a must:
>     support windows & mac ( the more consistent between the two the better)
>     free
>     no large install footprint, preferably simple install procedure (running on laptops)
>     syntax highlighting
>     straightforward to use
>
> anything else is a bonus.
>
> Whats your experience with what you use?
>
> Many thanks
> Nic

I only use vim, including the GUI version when I was on Windows a couple years ago, but I recently saw this blog post that suggests Sublime would be a good choice for noobs, who might be overwhelmed by vim's learning curve and want a more GUI-like experience:

https://medium.freecodecamp.org/why-i-still-use-vim-67afd76b4db6

On Sunday, 27 August 2017 at 18:14:07 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> On Sunday, 27 August 2017 at 18:08:52 UTC, Moritz Maxeiner wrote:
>> Indeed, but that's only the raw executable, not the full package (which includes things like syntax highlighting), which adds another 26MB.
>> But, yes, Textadept and vim+vim-core (Gentoo speak) are both gigantic required to bare bones vim. But bare bones vim doesn't fulfill the syntax highlighting requirement IIRC.
>
> I don't know how it is packaged on your system, but the vim syntax highlighting for D is like 12 KB and pretty easy to just drop in and use on its own.

One can definitely splice together one's own minimal vim with D support, but that would require more work than simply installing the right packages (which I assumed the requirement "simple to install" to exclude).
The 26MB I spoke of are localizations (manual, messages, keymaps), default shipped .vim files (like netrw, color schemes, languages, compiler support), docfiles, and vim-tutor, all of which are AFAIK part of the canonical vim distribution.

> I only use vim, including the GUI version when I was on Windows a couple years ago, but I recently saw this blog post that suggests Sublime would be a good choice for noobs, who might be overwhelmed by vim's learning curve and want a more GUI-like experience:
>
> https://medium.freecodecamp.org/why-i-still-use-vim-67afd76b4db6

I've already tried Sublime Text, and I agree that it's much more user-friendly than Vim.

But Geany is quite close to Sublime Text.

And it's 100% free and open source, really cross-platform, easy to download and install (14mb for the windows installer), while using very little resources and being very complete and user-friendly.

If you need a simple D IDE with all batteries included, I still think that CoEdit may be the best option, for the same reasons...

On Sunday, 27 August 2017 at 12:14:18 UTC, Ecstatic Coder wrote:
> If it's to learn D programming, then I strongly advice CoEdit (despite I think that Geany's automatic brace insertion and copy paste features work MUCH better).

For learning D but also if you program **only** in D. When the syntax is not D there's a generic highlighter (1 color for the identifiers and 1 other for the ascii symbols), so if you practive other PL alot, an editor + plugin migh fit better. In my case i'd probably use Geany as well not being fan of the other trands. THough i'm satisifed with Coedit.

On 28 August 2017 at 01:17, Moritz Maxeiner via Digitalmars-d < digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:

> On Sunday, 27 August 2017 at 13:15:41 UTC, Ryion wrote:
>
>> On Sunday, 27 August 2017 at 10:05:29 UTC, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
>>
>>> The following are a must:
>>>     no large install footprint
>>>
>>
>> Visual Studio Code seems to be what you need.
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> Relative low memory footprint for the functionality ( compared to several
>> IDEs that do the same ).
>>
>> [...]
>>
>
> The (must) requirement was install footprint, not memory footprint, and as
> Visual Studio code uses the electron framework[1] its install footprint is
> gigantic (about 180MB vs e.g. TextAdept's 20MB).
>

I kinda feel like 'large' probably begins roughly when footprint is
measured in GB... it's 2017 after all!
Even in 2000 180mb was only 'kinda-big-ish' ;)

On Sunday, 27 August 2017 at 18:08:52 UTC, Moritz Maxeiner wrote:
> It's nearly ten times the size, so yeah, it is relative to Textadept.
>
>> You can say the same thing in comparison with vim which is only a 2MB install size,
>> 20MB in comparison is gigantic.
>
> Indeed, but that's only the raw executable, not the full package (which includes things like syntax highlighting), which adds another 26MB.
> But, yes, Textadept and vim+vim-core (Gentoo speak) are both gigantic required to bare bones vim. But bare bones vim doesn't fulfill the syntax highlighting requirement IIRC.
>
>> The requirements are rather vague, you can interpret it in a number of ways.
>
> The sensible interpretation imho is "as low an install footprint as possible while still fulfilling the other requirements". I'm not aware of anything below ~20MB install footprint that fulfills the other requirements, but I'd be interested if you know any.

As the OP did not state any requirement, he can consider 2GB as small. Vague requirements do not invalidate the recommendation.

Laptops have 1TB harddrives as good as standard.

Even on a "small" 128GB SSD, it pales in comparison to the 10GB that Windows alone takes. Let alone the page file, swapfile, hibernation file etc...

>> I wouldn't consider 200MB gigantic in comparison to 20MB cause there is literally no difference of use for me.
>
> The thread is about OP's requirements.
>
>> You'd have to have a really shitty laptop for it to be an issue.
>
> Not relevant.

As the OP has not stated the size of the laptops it needs to be installed upon, the discussion about 180MB vs 20MB or 2MB is irrelevant. We are not talking a 4GB Visual Studio installation. And its 160MB for the 32Bit version. :)

So if the OP has other requirements, HE can state them in this topic, instead of you making up ideas as to what YOU consider small. Your comments are irrelevant without knowing the OP his expectations.

So again please do not distract from the topic.

On Monday, 28 August 2017 at 20:48:44 UTC, Ryion wrote:
> On Sunday, 27 August 2017 at 18:08:52 UTC, Moritz Maxeiner wrote:
>> It's nearly ten times the size, so yeah, it is relative to Textadept.
>>
>>> You can say the same thing in comparison with vim which is only a 2MB install size,
>>> 20MB in comparison is gigantic.
>>
>> Indeed, but that's only the raw executable, not the full package (which includes things like syntax highlighting), which adds another 26MB.
>> But, yes, Textadept and vim+vim-core (Gentoo speak) are both gigantic required to bare bones vim. But bare bones vim doesn't fulfill the syntax highlighting requirement IIRC.
>>
>>> The requirements are rather vague, you can interpret it in a number of ways.
>>
>> The sensible interpretation imho is "as low an install footprint as possible while still fulfilling the other requirements". I'm not aware of anything below ~20MB install footprint that fulfills the other requirements, but I'd be interested if you know any.
>
> As the OP did not state any requirement, he can consider 2GB as small.

If there's nothing significantly smaller that fits the other requirements, yes.
As those exists, no.

> Vague requirements do not invalidate the recommendation.

I don't consider the requirement to be vague if taken together with the other *must* requirements. On its own, I would agree with you.

>
> Laptops have 1TB harddrives as good as standard.
>
> Even on a "small" 128GB SSD, it pales in comparison to the 10GB that Windows alone takes. Let alone the page file, swapfile, hibernation file etc...

All red herrings.

>
>>> I wouldn't consider 200MB gigantic in comparison to 20MB cause there is literally no difference of use for me.
>>
>> The thread is about OP's requirements.
>>
>>> You'd have to have a really shitty laptop for it to be an issue.
>>
>> Not relevant.
>
> As the OP has not stated the size of the laptops it needs to be installed upon, the discussion about 180MB vs 20MB or 2MB is irrelevant.

Except I'm not arguing that ~20MB is small. It's just small compared to 180MB in this specific context as both fulfill the other requirements.
If I knew of a 2MB recommendation that fits the other requirements (such as easy to install) I would say 20MB is gigantic and consider my own recommendation to be invalid.

> We are not talking a 4GB Visual Studio installation. And its 160MB for the 32Bit version. :)

You say that particular discussion is irrelevant, yet you pursue it.

>
> So if the OP has other requirements, HE can state them in this topic, instead of you making up ideas as to what YOU consider small.

I'm not making up any ideas about what's small in terms of a fixed number; I've merely argued about size in relationship to each other, i.e. 180MB is gigantic only in relation to the 20MB under the assumption that both fulfill all other requirements. With regards to the requirements I've stated what I consider the sane interpretation, but if the OP clarifies that point to a hard number, that would indeed be helpful.

> Your comments are irrelevant without knowing the OP his expectations.

I consider OP's expectations to be clear from his posted requirements, so until OP has indeed clarified, I disagree.

>
> So again please do not distract from the topic.

Why "again"? You've not stated so before AFAICT.
Regardless, I disagree that discussing the validity of recommendations in a thread specifically made to gather such recommendations is a distraction from the topic; I would contend that it lies at the heart of the topic.

On Sunday, 27 August 2017 at 10:05:29 UTC, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
> So I will be doing a workshop on programming for the biology department at my university and I was wondering what would best suit the users.
>
> The following are a must:
>     support windows & mac ( the more consistent between the two the better)
>     free
>     no large install footprint, preferably simple install procedure (running on laptops)
>     syntax highlighting
>     straightforward to use
>
> anything else is a bonus.
>
> Whats your experience with what you use?
>
> Many thanks
> Nic

Try DlangIDE : https://github.com/buggins/dlangide

Simple IDE with DUB based project format, uses DUB to fetch dependencies, build and run projects. Support of basic debugging.
Syntax highlight, code completion, go to definition - using DCD.

Supports Windows, mac, linux.
Precompiled binaries for Windows: https://github.com/buggins/dlangide/releases

Distribution size for Windows - 5.4Mb zipped. Includes DUB and mago-mi debugger.


For Mac, it's easy to build it using DUB.

On Monday, 28 August 2017 at 21:17:19 UTC, Moritz Maxeiner wrote:
> Why "again"? You've not stated so before AFAICT.
> Regardless, I disagree that discussing the validity of recommendations in a thread specifically made to gather such recommendations is a distraction from the topic; I would contend that it lies at the heart of the topic.

The poster asked for programs that fit his (vague) criteria, it is NOT up to you to determine what those criteria are and then belittle people there posts that try to help out with there own recommendations. The fact that you can not see this even now, really is a issue.

And i am not referring to this topic alone or those that i personally post in. There are many where the same patterns are viable and i notice the pattern, that its always your name next to those posts.

Is it so hard for you to not always override topics here and constant "straw man" or other terms calling. And i use this term because because you constantly write "irrelevant", "straw man argumentation", "but I don't care" and other belittling statements that seem to indicate that your opinion means more then others. Or how you supposedly do not care and have no issue pointing it out half a dozen times.

It gets very fast tiresome. You are the only poster that i see here that is non-stop doing this. If you do not like something or find it irrelevant, then do not respond to it. But they way you act, like posts are below or irrelevant to you...

This is the "again" i refer to. You do this is a lot of topics. You dissect people there posts and write how it is irrelevant to you or some other clever looking down terminology. It totally distracts from the topic at hand and frankly, makes people less likely to continue topics.

Its this kind of attitude that in MY personal opinion makes this mailing board toxic for new users. While you are not impolite, the way you act upon people the posts makes it hard to have a honest discussion with you without it turning off-topic or simply scaring away people.

So again polity again, to refrain from acting like this and let people have there own opinion without you dissecting every piece. Its turns topic off-topic and adds no value to the discussion. I await your next well written comment how what i wrote is irrelevant and how you do not notice this behavior.

This site really needs a proper forum with the ability to block specific posters and make this board less toxic. Because 99.9% of the people here are nice but your behavior is hard to deal with. And i am sure you will disagree with this.

Stay out of my posts and stop looking down on people and we will get along. This is my last post on this off-topic issue.

On Tuesday, 29 August 2017 at 14:05:13 UTC, Ryion wrote:
> On Monday, 28 August 2017 at 21:17:19 UTC, Moritz Maxeiner wrote:
>> Why "again"? You've not stated so before AFAICT.
>> Regardless, I disagree that discussing the validity of recommendations in a thread specifically made to gather such recommendations is a distraction from the topic; I would contend that it lies at the heart of the topic.
>
> The poster asked for programs that fit his (vague) criteria, it is NOT up to you to determine what those criteria are

We're repeating ourselves here, so we're going to have to agree to disagree, as I don't agree that that's what I was doing.

> and then belittle people there posts that try to help out with there own recommendations. The fact that you can not see this even now, really is a issue.

I don't consider the way I argue to be belittling and I resent the accusation.
Side point: DlangIDE invalidates my recommendation, as well

>
> And i am not referring to this topic alone or those that i personally post in. There are many where the same patterns are viable and i notice the pattern, that its always your name next to those posts.
>
> Is it so hard for you to not always override topics here and constant "straw man" or other terms calling.

I have to point out that when I attribute "straw man" to a quote, it's because the author of that quote has responded to something I wrote, but argued against a point that I did not make, which is a logical fallacy. The same applies to other such fallacies such as "red herring" and if you do catch me in one, I do hope you point it out, as it is hard to see when one is committing one oneself.

> And i use this term because because you constantly write "irrelevant", "straw man argumentation", "but I don't care" and other belittling statements that seem to indicate that your opinion means more then others.

I don't see how pointing out logical fallacies constitutes belittling (again, please do point them out if you catch me in one).
W.r.t. the "I don't care" (I assume you refer to the website thread): If I perceive someone trying to engage me in a topic I have no interest in after I've commented about general procedure (which applies to the topic being turned from idea to tangible result) I can either ignore them, or point out that it doesn't interest me. I consider the first option to be ruder.
Lastly the "irrelevant": If someone disagrees with me dismissing their argument like that I welcome a counter argument as to why they do consider it relevant to the point I was making in the quote they replied to.

> Or how you supposedly do not care and have no issue pointing it out half a dozen times.

I pointed it out again when despite earlier comment(s) on the subject the attempt to engage me in it was made again.

>
> It gets very fast tiresome. You are the only poster that i see here that is non-stop doing this. If you do not like something or find it irrelevant, then do not respond to it.

I generally don't; if someone responds either to me, or posts in a discussion I've joined, that's another matter, though.

> But they way you act, like posts are below or irrelevant to you...

If they were I wouldn't take the time to respond.
I point these things in responses to me out because I hope for a reply containing an actual counter argument to the point I was making.

>
> This is the "again" i refer to. You do this is a lot of topics. You dissect people there posts and write how it is irrelevant to you or some other clever looking down terminology. It totally distracts from the topic at hand and frankly, makes people less likely to continue topics.

I strongly disagree that pointing out logical fallacies distracts from the topic at hand, because that's what logical fallacies do.
W.r.t. post dissection: Addressing individual points allows the exchange of specific arguments and counter arguments.

>
> Its this kind of attitude that in MY personal opinion makes this mailing board toxic for new users. While you are not impolite, the way you act upon people the posts makes it hard to have a honest discussion with you without it turning off-topic or simply scaring away people.

I'm not sure if you're making the point that you want to write things to me that you don't want to expose others to, or that you don't feel that you can have a discussion with me on account of how I write. For the former: You can send me a private email. For the latter: The best I can do is assure you that I'll refrain from responding to you first in a thread (unless there are exceptional circumstances); if you respond to me, that's another matter.

>
> So again polity again, to refrain from acting like this and let people have there own opinion without you dissecting every piece.

Again, if someone replies to me with a logical fallacy, I will point that out; the same way I would expect them to point it out if I were to do it.
I will also address the individual points they were making as a response to me as I don't see how that conflicts with them having their opinions.

> Its turns topic off-topic and adds no value to the discussion. I await your next well written comment how what i wrote is irrelevant and how you do not notice this behavior.

Thank you for saying they are well written.
I don't consider what you wrote irrelevant, as it did not deviate from the point we were discussing and it did cause me to reflect and reevaluate.
In hindsight it would've been better for me not to respond first to you and wait for OPs evaluation of the recommendations; it doesn't change my earlier mentioned position that I consider his requirements being clear enough, but I did unnecessarily escalate first, for which I apologize.
The other behavior you mention when I respond to someone responding to me, however, is quite deliberate (as I've explained in the above), because I consider pointing out flaws in a discussion vital to that discussion's usefulness.

>
> This site really needs a proper forum with the ability to block specific posters and make this board less toxic. Because 99.9% of the people here are nice but your behavior is hard to deal with.

If it interests you, the forum is a web frontend for a newsgroups server [1]. If you have a newsgroup reader (most major desktop mail clients support subscribing to newsgroups), you can use that interface; most such newsgroup readers include a killfile to which you can add people whose posts you don't wish to see.

> And i am sure you will disagree with this.

I don't disagree, as it's an opinion, not an argument in a (technical) discussion.

>
> Stay out of my posts

If that is what you wish, outside of exceptional circumstances, I won't respond to you first.

> and stop looking down on people

I repeat that I resent this accusation.

> and we will get along. This is my last post on this off-topic issue.

[1] http://www.digitalmars.com/NewsGroup.html