On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:00:49PM +0200, monarch_dodra wrote:
> On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 20:58:06 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> >On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 08:38:49PM +0000, Justin Whear wrote:
> >>On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 20:02:02 +0000, Justin Whear wrote:
> >>
> >>> vim and gvim on linux.
> >>
> >>Unix is my IDE.
> >
> >+1, I like that!! :)
> >
> >I'm gonna hafta start saying that from now on, whenever people ask
> >me
> >about IDEs.
> >
> >
> >T
> 
> notepad++ on windows.
> 
> kate on linux. Though I do *try* to learn vim (as in, be efficient
> with it, not quite there yet).

vim (and all vi-derived editors) is... shall we say, a unique beast all its own. It requires a different *mode* of thinking (har har) than your usual GUI-based editors.  In most other editors, you think in terms of "move cursor here, type some characters, move cursor there, hit delete a few times", etc..  But in vi(m), you operate on a different level of abstraction. Rather than thinking in terms of individual cursor movements and single-character operations, you're thinking in terms of abstract editing operations: "go to the word that begins with 'vo', replace the word with 'int', go back to the start of the paragraph, open a new line of text above it", etc..

For many years, I hated vi, vim, and all of its ilk. I found them all very foreign and counterintuitive, and therefore unproductive. It wasn't until my supervisor at my first job persuaded me to try it, that I finally, reluctantly, sat down to learn it for real. At first, I hated its modality -- being used to the *other* kind of editors all my life till then, I found myself fighting with vi's modality all the time -- because I was still thinking in the other mindset, you see. But most of the machines I had to work with at the time didn't have a sufficiently-sane editor on it (for a while I was copying pico onto every machine I lay my hands on, but that grew tiresome), except vi, which was installed by default on Solaris. So I was forced to use vi a lot.

And then it started to grow on me. I found myself thinking more and more in terms of abstract operations like I described above, rather than individual cursor movements and keypresses. And I started acquiring that twitch in my left little finger that wants to hit ESC every now and then, for no good reason. :-P

Nowadays, I find myself handicapped when using any non-vi editor. What, you mean I have to take my hands off their usual place on the keyboard just to move the cursor?! Why does every keypress modify the text?! Why doesn't hitting ESC put me in navigation mode?! Why doesn't ':wq' work?! Why can't I move down by 12 paragraphs instead of hitting the down key 120 times?! (Which, incidentally, takes only 3 keystrokes in vim: '12}'.)

*shrug*


T

-- 
Acid falls with the rain; with love comes the pain.

On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 21:15:03 UTC, Flamaros wrote:
> On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 19:48:18 UTC, Namespace wrote:
>> Just out of interest.
>>
>> I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I will try this evening VisualD.
>
> Mainly VisualD and for linux Mono-D.
>
> Mono-D have a great auto completion.

That's true. But is it better than with VisualD?

I'm suprised that so few use an IDE. :D

On 9/13/2013 1:40 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> No syntax highlighting...

I know :-) I've thought many, many times about transforming it into an IDE with all the goodies.

But probably its most annoying lack is not handling Unicode.

On 9/13/2013 1:58 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> Syntax highlighting hurts my eyes. I've been using vim in black-on-white
> for more than a decade now. (Well, more accurately, black on an almost
> fully saturated off-white, but that's irrelevant.)

I tend to agree. I think syntax highlighting looks better if it's a subtle color change, not a glaring one. Unfortunately, in text mode, color palette is very limited.

On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:18:45PM +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 21:09:40 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> >I do. I prefer to keep code in a single place, i.e., on my PC, so when I'm away from my desk (travelling, house-sitting for my mother-in-law, etc.), I use GNU screen over ssh.
> 
> The headers of your messages tell me that you probably do email the same way I do too: keep it all on the home computer and ssh in with mutt!

Yup!

I grew up with pine, until its limitations left me pining for something better... (har har)  I tried several alternatives but didn't like any of them, until I met mutt. Mutt is far more configurable than pine, and can handle a lot of stuff pine can't (this was over a decade ago, though, I don't know if this is still true... or if pine even exists anymore).

I hate leaving my mail on some remote mailserver; I like keeping it all on my home PC (so that they are always accessible even if my 'Net connection goes down every now and then). So I set up my MX to deliver all mail to my PC, and I check mail with ssh/mutt. Nowadays I can even do this from my Android phone, though the low resolution and lack of a real keyboard does make it rather awkward to use.


> (I use the website for replying to D postings though, since the mailing list interface I find unreliable for outgoing messages.)

The website is too GUI-like for my tastes. I prefer doing everything from mutt. :)


T

-- 
Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence. -- Napoleon Bonaparte

On 9/13/2013 1:46 PM, Peter Alexander wrote:
> Do you actually write significant amounts of code on remote machines? I'm
> struggling to find a reason to do that.

Also keep in mind the ME's bandwidth requirements are very very small, so it is snappy even on a miserably slow connection.

(It was designed in the day of 300 baud modems.)

On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:12:15PM +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 20:51:50 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> >I'd normally use. I love sshfs, I wish Windows had it.
> 
> I actually shelled out... I think $20 a few years ago, for a program called ExpanDrive on Windows, which connects via ssh to my Linux box and presents it as a windows drive. Pretty cool, it works fairly well and is a nice supplement to putty.

Putty is about the only reason I can tolerate using Windows at all... I mean, what else is Windows for, if not logging into a *real* OS where the real work is done? ;-)


T

-- 
What do you mean the Internet isn't filled with subliminal messages? What about all those buttons marked "submit"??

On Friday, September 13, 2013 21:48:15 Namespace wrote:
> Just out of interest.
> 
> I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I will try this evening VisualD.

I use gvim regardless of the language that I'm writing in. I even use it for word processing, because if I have to write a document that requires that, I use LaTex.

- Jonathan M Davis

On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 21:40:40 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:12:15PM +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
>> On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 20:51:50 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>> >I'd normally use. I love sshfs, I wish Windows had it.
>> 
>> I actually shelled out... I think $20 a few years ago, for a program
>> called ExpanDrive on Windows, which connects via ssh to my Linux box
>> and presents it as a windows drive. Pretty cool, it works fairly
>> well and is a nice supplement to putty.
>
> Putty is about the only reason I can tolerate using Windows at all... I
> mean, what else is Windows for, if not logging into a *real* OS where
> the real work is done? ;-)
>
>
> T

tz ;)

On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 21:28:01 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-09-13 at 23:20 +0200, John Colvin wrote:
>> On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 19:48:18 UTC, Namespace wrote:
>> > Just out of interest.
>> >
>> > I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I will try this evening VisualD.
>> 
>> GNU Emacs
>
> Emacs 24, there is no other editor. :-)

With DCD as well, I really couldn't imagine a better environment for coding in D.