It seems to be article season, and I'm on a bit of a punditry mood, so here's a blog post I wrote recently:

http://pureconcepture.blogspot.com/2011/05/emacs-or-vi-why-answer-is-neither.html

It's not about D, but it's a software development issue that has popped up several times here in the NG... :)


-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer

On Thu, 02 Jun 2011 17:49:52 +0100, Bruno Medeiros wrote:

> It seems to be article season, and I'm on a bit of a punditry mood, so here's a blog post I wrote recently:
> 
> http://pureconcepture.blogspot.com/2011/05/emacs-or-vi-why-answer-is-
neither.html
> 
> It's not about D, but it's a software development issue that has popped up several times here in the NG... :)

I'm sorry but your conclusion is something I cannot agree with on many points. The big thing you miss is that most code is text. I can agree that Vim (I will not speak for Emacs) is not a good IDE and is bad at understanding the semantics of a language. But to dismiss a text editor for writing code because it is textual...

Personally I don't like working in Java without Eclipse and in C# without VS or MonoDevelop. But many times I will open the file in Vim or just copy and past a section of code in Vim just so I can have a text editor to edit my text. I miss Vim in my terminal.

I don't claim to know the ins and outs of an IDE, but you haven't convinced me. Vim's understanding of the code is zero, the closest thing it has is the ability to navigate tags which are generated by ctags. It only works for navigation and those languages supported by the program (just like an IDE). But some things, like a Type Hierarchy and Outline should be created by the documentation generator.

Some other items are very nice, but are not common during a days coding. I rename variables all the time, but usually these are local in scope and and can be done with a quick search and replace on a selection or file.

Extracting a method is common and the ability to identify needed parameters is certainly very nice. Parameter modification is going to be more of a find all calls to this function then a "I'll do it for you." and the Content Assist (more than just auto-complete). And to this I generally just miss Vim more than these features, but are still the reasons I keep and IDE one it is available.

The strangest credit you gave an IDE, "navigate to member/element above/ below - Ctrl-Shift-Up/Down), word navigate (Ctrl-Left/Right)" This is Vim territory here. And you left off search, that one is simple in any editor, but with Vim you can be selecting text and search to where you want to end the selection. There are tons of ways to navigate in vim. Using * to find the next instance of a word, w to jump a word, % to navigate to the matching paren/bracket/etc.

I'd like to leave you with a thought experiment. The next time you need to change a word (not rename a variable), or change all the content inside quotes and think to yourself, this would be easier in Vim. You don't have to believe it, but I bet you if you remember to tell yourself this you'll see how common it is. I've done this very thing except mine was "If I could just remember that command to do this."

On 11/06/2011 19:51, Jesse Phillips wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Jun 2011 17:49:52 +0100, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
>
>> It seems to be article season, and I'm on a bit of a punditry mood, so
>> here's a blog post I wrote recently:
>>
>> http://pureconcepture.blogspot.com/2011/05/emacs-or-vi-why-answer-is-
> neither.html
>>
>> It's not about D, but it's a software development issue that has popped
>> up several times here in the NG... :)
>
> I'm sorry but your conclusion is something I cannot agree with on many
> points. The big thing you miss is that most code is text. I can agree
> that Vim (I will not speak for Emacs) is not a good IDE and is bad at
> understanding the semantics of a language. But to dismiss a text editor
> for writing code because it is textual...
>
> Personally I don't like working in Java without Eclipse and in C# without
> VS or MonoDevelop. But many times I will open the file in Vim or just
> copy and past a section of code in Vim just so I can have a text editor
> to edit my text. I miss Vim in my terminal.
>
> I don't claim to know the ins and outs of an IDE, but you haven't
> convinced me. Vim's understanding of the code is zero, the closest thing
> it has is the ability to navigate tags which are generated by ctags. It
> only works for navigation and those languages supported by the program
> (just like an IDE). But some things, like a Type Hierarchy and Outline
> should be created by the documentation generator.

Actually, this is incorrect - http://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=3302 - With this plugin, vim has full semantic completion for C/C++/Objective-C/Objective-C++.

> Some other items are very nice, but are not common during a days coding.
> I rename variables all the time, but usually these are local in scope and
> and can be done with a quick search and replace on a selection or file.
>
> Extracting a method is common and the ability to identify needed
> parameters is certainly very nice. Parameter modification is going to be
> more of a find all calls to this function then a "I'll do it for you."
> and the Content Assist (more than just auto-complete). And to this I
> generally just miss Vim more than these features, but are still the
> reasons I keep and IDE one it is available.
>
> The strangest credit you gave an IDE, "navigate to member/element above/
> below - Ctrl-Shift-Up/Down), word navigate (Ctrl-Left/Right)" This is Vim
> territory here. And you left off search, that one is simple in any
> editor, but with Vim you can be selecting text and search to where you
> want to end the selection. There are tons of ways to navigate in vim.
> Using * to find the next instance of a word, w to jump a word, % to
> navigate to the matching paren/bracket/etc.
>
> I'd like to leave you with a thought experiment. The next time you need
> to change a word (not rename a variable), or change all the content
> inside quotes and think to yourself, this would be easier in Vim. You
> don't have to believe it, but I bet you if you remember to tell yourself
> this you'll see how common it is. I've done this very thing except mine
> was "If I could just remember that command to do this."

There's far too much mouse usage in IDEs for me. You mean I have to move my hands away from the keyboard to do a find and replace? Pfft :<

-- 
Robert
http://octarineparrot.com/

Am 11.06.2011 21:32, schrieb Robert Clipsham:
> There's far too much mouse usage in IDEs for me. You mean I have to move my hands away from the keyboard to do a find and replace? Pfft :<
> 

In Eclipse: Ctrl-F for find and replace, Alt-Shift-R to rename a variable/class/whatever for the whole workspace (at least for Java, not sure if CDT supports that as well).

Cheers,
- Daniel

On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Daniel Gibson <metalcaedes@gmail.com>wrote:

> Am 11.06.2011 21:32, schrieb Robert Clipsham:
> > There's far too much mouse usage in IDEs for me. You mean I have to move my hands away from the keyboard to do a find and replace? Pfft :<
> >
>
> In Eclipse: Ctrl-F for find and replace, Alt-Shift-R to rename a variable/class/whatever for the whole workspace (at least for Java, not sure if CDT supports that as well).


F3 for "Go To Definition" (works in DDT)
F4 for "View Type Hierarchy" (doesn't seem to work in DDT)
ctrl+space for autocomplete (sometimes works in DDT)

On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 20:32:09 +0100, Robert Clipsham wrote:

>> I don't claim to know the ins and outs of an IDE, but you haven't convinced me. Vim's understanding of the code is zero, the closest thing it has is the ability to navigate tags which are generated by ctags. It only works for navigation and those languages supported by the program (just like an IDE). But some things, like a Type Hierarchy and Outline should be created by the documentation generator.
> 
> Actually, this is incorrect - http://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=3302 - With this plugin, vim has full semantic completion for C/C++/Objective-C/Objective-C++.

Well, I'm not sure if that makes my statement incorrect. Vim still doesn't understand the code. It does work well with external programs (ctags, and clang in this case), which I was avoiding going over since it isn't Vim and they can sometimes either be a PITA to setup, use, or find.

I suppose one point I forgot to comment on: "If all the best shortcuts are taken for text operations, and little is left for semantic operations, or for that matter, for other language toolchain functionality (like building, debugging), that is clearly suboptimal."

Vim has no concept of a "best shortcut" they are all equal and by no means are they all taken up. I don't even know of a command that combines shift and ctrl. And it is clearly easy to build the program :make

On 6/2/11 11:49 PM, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
> It seems to be article season, and I'm on a bit of a punditry mood, so
> here's a blog post I wrote recently:
>
> http://pureconcepture.blogspot.com/2011/05/emacs-or-vi-why-answer-is-neither.html
>
>
> It's not about D, but it's a software development issue that has popped
> up several times here in the NG... :)

IDEs are good for languages that need IDEs. For languages that don't need IDEs, vi is good. :-)

On 11/06/2011 19:51, Jesse Phillips wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Jun 2011 17:49:52 +0100, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
>
>> It seems to be article season, and I'm on a bit of a punditry mood, so
>> here's a blog post I wrote recently:
>>
>> http://pureconcepture.blogspot.com/2011/05/emacs-or-vi-why-answer-is-
> neither.html
>>
>> It's not about D, but it's a software development issue that has popped
>> up several times here in the NG... :)
>
> I'm sorry but your conclusion is something I cannot agree with on many
> points. The big thing you miss is that most code is text. I can agree
> that Vim (I will not speak for Emacs) is not a good IDE and is bad at
> understanding the semantics of a language. But to dismiss a text editor
> for writing code because it is textual...
>

Yes, most code is text. So what?


>
> The strangest credit you gave an IDE, "navigate to member/element above/
> below - Ctrl-Shift-Up/Down), word navigate (Ctrl-Left/Right)" This is Vim
> territory here. And you left off search, that one is simple in any
> editor, but with Vim you can be selecting text and search to where you
> want to end the selection. There are tons of ways to navigate in vim.
> Using * to find the next instance of a word, w to jump a word, % to
> navigate to the matching paren/bracket/etc.
>

Ok, maybe word navigate Ctrl-Left/Right is mostly textual than otherwise (although in JDT that is still done with knowledge of the language). But that is just one of several tasks I mentioned. Not enough to turn the argument.
And navigate to member/element above/below is not Vim territory, from what I understand of your posts. This requires a basic semantic understanding, it's not the same as (or replaceable with) bracket matching. Do you understand how it works? Say you have the cursor inside a function (or next to the name of the function). If you navigate member up/down, the cursor will go the name of the function sibling to the one you are now. Does Vim have this operation?

> I'd like to leave you with a thought experiment. The next time you need
> to change a word (not rename a variable), or change all the content
> inside quotes and think to yourself, this would be easier in Vim. You
> don't have to believe it, but I bet you if you remember to tell yourself
> this you'll see how common it is. I've done this very thing except mine
> was "If I could just remember that command to do this."

If by word you mean something in a string literal (something inside quotes), or a word in documentation, then I can tell you already it's really uncommon for me do that, if not downright rare. The closest thing I have is changing code that is commented, that one happens sometimes. But it doesn't happen nearly as often as the other semantic operations Vim doesn't have.




> Personally I don't like working in Java without Eclipse and in C# without
> VS or MonoDevelop. But many times I will open the file in Vim or just
> copy and past a section of code in Vim just so I can have a text editor
> to edit my text. I miss Vim in my terminal.
>
> I don't claim to know the ins and outs of an IDE, but you haven't
> convinced me. Vim's understanding of the code is zero, the closest thing
> it has is the ability to navigate tags which are generated by ctags. It
> only works for navigation and those languages supported by the program
> (just like an IDE). But some things, like a Type Hierarchy and Outline
> should be created by the documentation generator.
>
> Some other items are very nice, but are not common during a days coding.
> I rename variables all the time, but usually these are local in scope and
> and can be done with a quick search and replace on a selection or file.
>

Why is it that it is not common "during a days coding"? Why local variables are common, but not functions, methods, classes, modules, etc.? What languages are talking about here?

For me to convince (or just argue) any further, I would have to look at your work patterns and workflow. It's hard to make a concrete and more objective argument otherwise.
But my suspicion is that you (as well as many other programmers) mostly use languages that are very hard to have semantic operations available in tools (like C/C++ by "virtue" of their preprocessor and metaprogramming, or dynamic and scripting languages by "virtue" of their lack of static typing). Thus you never understand the potential of it, because you never fully experienced it. Note that this is not something you can just try in a few days of trying Java and an IDE, rather it grows on you after long periods of development experience. A bit quicker if you are wiser ;)

Reminds me of when I was a kid in high school, and I knew a fair amount of C, and did a fair amount of toy coding there. I had a friend who coded in Pascal, he didn't know C. I tried to explain him that C was better, I said stuff like "the syntax is cleaner, it's more simple yet more powerful, it's more elegant" etc., etc. but my friend did not understand and never agreed. He saw no reason to change. Only later, when he actually tried and learned C (before, and because of, going to college), he came back to me said, yeah, "you were right", "now I see what you mean, C is much better".

A similar thing happens today. Think of the DVCS "revolution". How many coders, even though they were not fans of Subversion, and knew branching and merging was hard and could be better, only understood the power, benefits, and "paradigm shift" of DVCS when they actually started using them for a while?? Whereas before they were a bit skeptical of all the benefits? (See the Joel on Software intro to Mercurial for example)


This is the same feeling I have whenever I discuss this IDE vs. not issue. It just seem to me the people on the not camp don't get the paradigm shift. Case in point: I've yet to meet an experienced Java programmer who would fundamentally disagree with me on this issue. Yes, this anecdotal, but note that in any case meeting *one* such programmer would not counter my point: which is that in the Java world virtually everyone uses (prefers) an IDE.
Some will say that's a fault of Java, and that Java "requires an IDE", like Ary said. But that is another discussion (which I strongly disagree, of course).


-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer

On 12/06/2011 13:32, Ary Manzana wrote:
> On 6/2/11 11:49 PM, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
>> It seems to be article season, and I'm on a bit of a punditry mood, so
>> here's a blog post I wrote recently:
>>
>> http://pureconcepture.blogspot.com/2011/05/emacs-or-vi-why-answer-is-neither.html
>>
>>
>>
>> It's not about D, but it's a software development issue that has popped
>> up several times here in the NG... :)
>
> IDEs are good for languages that need IDEs. For languages that don't
> need IDEs, vi is good. :-)

IDEs are good for languages that can benefit from IDEs. For languages that can't benefit from IDEs, you're stuck with vi. :-)

-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer

Bruno Medeiros Wrote:

> It seems to be article season, and I'm on a bit of a punditry mood, so here's a blog post I wrote recently:
> 
> http://pureconcepture.blogspot.com/2011/05/emacs-or-vi-why-answer-is-neither.html
> 
> It's not about D, but it's a software development issue that has popped up several times here in the NG... :)

Theoretically IDE is better but Visual Studio
1. Loads a solution 20 seconds.
2. Hits OutOfMemoryException regularly after which it can randomly crash or do funny things.
3. Can't run for longer than a day.
4. Can't work on more than one solution at a time. Combined with 1 switching between solutions is pain in the ass.

Text editors may have less features but they're not so annoying, they just work. Well, I agree, the net productivity of visual studio is still higher, but it's tricky to stay sane working with it.