On Wed, 2010-10-13 at 16:24 -0700, Jonathan M Davis wrote: [ . . . ]
> Proper code completion, correctly jumping to function definitions, and various other features that IDEs generally do well tend to be quite poor in vim. It can do many of them on some level, but for instance, while ctags does give you the ability to jump to function declarations, it does quite poorly in the face of identical variable names across files. There are a number of IDE features that I would love to have and use but vim can't properly pull off. When I have a decent IDE, I'm always torn on whether to use vim or the IDE. vim (well, gvim) generally wins out, but sometimes the extra abilities of the IDE are just too useful. What I'd really like is full-featured IDE with complete and completely remappable vim bindings.

Bizarrely the single feature that fails for me in Eclipse, NetBeans and
IntelliJ IDEA that I find the single most problematic feature in my
programming life -- which means Emacs remains the one true editor -- is
formatting comments.  I seemingly cannot survive without the ability to
reformat the paragraphs of comment blocks to a given width.  Emacs
handles this trivially in all languages I use for the modes I have.  The
IDEs seem unable to provide the functionality.  Usually they end up
reformatting my entire file to some bizarre formatting that is not the
one set up for the project.  I appreciate that being able to trivially
create properly formatted comments is probably uniquely my problem
but . . .

-- 
Russel. ============================================================================= Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder@ekiga.net 41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel@russel.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder

Code::Blocks:

	Works quite well for Windows and Linux, except for some occasional dependency problems because of single-file compilation. Unusable on Mac because of keyboard shortcut issues. Project and build option configuration is a bit complicated and the toolchain-settings need to be tweaked manually.

VisualD:

	Now seems quite stable and works well, good debugger integration. Right now I have to switch back to Code::Blocks on Windows because of DMD linking problems in the compile-everything-at-once-build that VisualD does (normally preferrable).

D for XCode:

	Works really well for me on Mac OS since I took the time to understand the XCode project structure. It has, however, some serious problems with its dependency calculation and also does only single-file builds.

I tried Descent several times and its semantic features were great, but the missing D2 support was always a problem.

Sönke Ludwig wrote:
> Code::Blocks:
> 
>     Works quite well for Windows and Linux, except for some occasional dependency problems because of single-file compilation. Unusable on Mac because of keyboard shortcut issues. Project and build option configuration is a bit complicated and the toolchain-settings need to be tweaked manually.

Some Mac OS X keyboard shortcut issues were fixed in "10.05-p1"...

If you are talking about the optional-but-default keybinder plugin.

--anders

Russel Winder wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-10-13 at 16:24 -0700, Jonathan M Davis wrote: [ . . . ]
>> Proper code completion, correctly jumping to function definitions, and various other features that IDEs generally do well tend to be quite poor in vim. It can do many of them on some level, but for instance, while ctags does give you the ability to jump to function declarations, it does quite poorly in the face of identical variable names across files. There are a number of IDE features that I would love to have and use but vim can't properly pull off. When I have a decent IDE, I'm always torn on whether to use vim or the IDE. vim (well, gvim) generally wins out, but sometimes the extra abilities of the IDE are just too useful. What I'd really like is full-featured IDE with complete and completely remappable vim bindings.
> 
> Bizarrely the single feature that fails for me in Eclipse, NetBeans and
> IntelliJ IDEA that I find the single most problematic feature in my
> programming life -- which means Emacs remains the one true editor -- is
> formatting comments.  I seemingly cannot survive without the ability to
> reformat the paragraphs of comment blocks to a given width.  Emacs
> handles this trivially in all languages I use for the modes I have.  The
> IDEs seem unable to provide the functionality.  Usually they end up
> reformatting my entire file to some bizarre formatting that is not the
> one set up for the project.  I appreciate that being able to trivially
> create properly formatted comments is probably uniquely my problem
> but . . .
> 
	Same here, no IDE I've seen is able to format code and comments as
well as (X)Emacs.

		Jerome
-- 
mailto:jeberger@free.fr
http://jeberger.free.fr
Jabber: jeberger@jabber.fr

On 10/16/10 4:50 CDT, "Jérôme M. Berger" wrote:
> 	Same here, no IDE I've seen is able to format code and comments as
> well as (X)Emacs.

Yah. Emacs' formatting abilities are like real estate prices in Houston: once you got calibrated to them, it's hard to move away.

Andrei

Am 14.10.2010 11:46, schrieb Anders F Björklund:
> Sönke Ludwig wrote:
>> Code::Blocks:
>>
>> Works quite well for Windows and Linux, except for some occasional
>> dependency problems because of single-file compilation. Unusable on
>> Mac because of keyboard shortcut issues. Project and build option
>> configuration is a bit complicated and the toolchain-settings need to
>> be tweaked manually.
>
> Some Mac OS X keyboard shortcut issues were fixed in "10.05-p1"...
>
> If you are talking about the optional-but-default keybinder plugin.
>
> --anders

Yes, that version indeed fixes the cmd-key issue that was the problem (had to clean my Application Support/codeblocks directory though). I missed that release although I checked the front page and the nightly forum multiple times after the release. Thanks for the hint!

Sönke

On 2010-10-12 21:57:44 -0400, Michael Stover <michael.r.stover@gmail.com> said:

> Elephant appears dead.  Poseidon's activity is extremely low and is still
> alpha after 5 years. LEDS is even less active, and DDT doesn't have a
> release yet.  What do actual D programmers use?

I'm using Xcode, with the D plugin for Xcode I made.
<http://michelf.com/projects/d-for-xcode/>

-- 
Michel Fortin
michel.fortin@michelf.com
http://michelf.com/

On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 08:59:10 -0500
>>>>>> "Andrei" == Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

Andrei> Yah. Emacs' formatting abilities are like real estate prices in Andrei> Houston: once you got calibrated to them, it's hard to move Andrei> away.

It looks there is no perfect IDE for D available (yet) - Qt is missing D support, Codeblocks lacks integration with e.g. QtD...so now when we'll start learning D (when will this TDPL arrive), I think I may just continue using Emacs, but I wonder if you (D users using Emacs) can recommend what would be the best code-completion system for it?


Sincerely,
Gour

-- 

Gour  | Hlapicina, Croatia  | GPG key: CDBF17CA
----------------------------------------------------------------

On 16/10/2010 10:50, "Jérôme M. Berger" wrote:
> Russel Winder wrote:
>> On Wed, 2010-10-13 at 16:24 -0700, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>> [ . . . ]
>>> Proper code completion, correctly jumping to function definitions, and various
>>> other features that IDEs generally do well tend to be quite poor in vim. It can
>>> do many of them on some level, but for instance, while ctags does give you the
>>> ability to jump to function declarations, it does quite poorly in the face of
>>> identical variable names across files. There are a number of IDE features that I
>>> would love to have and use but vim can't properly pull off. When I have a decent
>>> IDE, I'm always torn on whether to use vim or the IDE. vim (well, gvim)
>>> generally wins out, but sometimes the extra abilities of the IDE are just too
>>> useful. What I'd really like is full-featured IDE with complete and completely
>>> remappable vim bindings.
>>
>> Bizarrely the single feature that fails for me in Eclipse, NetBeans and
>> IntelliJ IDEA that I find the single most problematic feature in my
>> programming life -- which means Emacs remains the one true editor -- is
>> formatting comments.  I seemingly cannot survive without the ability to
>> reformat the paragraphs of comment blocks to a given width.  Emacs
>> handles this trivially in all languages I use for the modes I have.  The
>> IDEs seem unable to provide the functionality.  Usually they end up
>> reformatting my entire file to some bizarre formatting that is not the
>> one set up for the project.  I appreciate that being able to trivially
>> create properly formatted comments is probably uniquely my problem
>> but . . .
>>
> 	Same here, no IDE I've seen is able to format code and comments as
> well as (X)Emacs.
>
> 		Jerome

Interesting. For anyone else who shares that opinion, what are the IDE's that you have seen? In particular, does this include JDT?


-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer

Bruno Medeiros wrote:
> On 16/10/2010 10:50, "Jérôme M. Berger" wrote:
>>     Same here, no IDE I've seen is able to format code and comments as
>> well as (X)Emacs.
>>
>>         Jerome
> 
> Interesting. For anyone else who shares that opinion, what are the IDE's that you have seen? In particular, does this include JDT?
> 
	Well, I don't do any Java development, but it does include CDT...

		Jerome
-- 
mailto:jeberger@free.fr
http://jeberger.free.fr
Jabber: jeberger@jabber.fr