[ILoveJava]

What do you use, and why?

I use a text editor, because well, I run Ubuntu because my Windows partition doesn't boot and JCreator LE doesn't run on Ubuntu.

[Dormilich]

sometimes a text editor, sometimes an IDE as long as there is syntax highlighting (at least)

This post has been edited by Dormilich: 31 March 2012 - 12:13 AM

[Locke]

I'm basically the same way. On Ubuntu, I just use the command line and GEdit or Emacs if I'm feeling adventurous.

On Windows, a full-blown IDE is usually what I go for.

[Ryano121]

Depends on the size of the project.

For a couple of source files I can usually get away with fancy text editor (like Notepad++).

But when I start getting a load of source files, and resources all of the place, I have to use a full IDE to preserve my sanity.

Also I have to use an IDE to sufficiently debug my code.

[Duckington]

IDE every day of the week. I used to use just a simple note-pad style text editor, but using an IDE with features like: syntax highlighting, brace highlighting, auto complete, documentation, etc.... has saved sooo much time and effort on my part.

[Sergio Tapia]

For Rails development and Python scripting I use Sublime Text 2.

For .NET development I use an IDE, Visual Studio, because 'duh'.

I really can't recommend Sublime Text 2 enough. It's phenomenal.

[jon.kiparsky]

A real OS is a development environment.

[BBuschRN]

Sorry, but why would you consider using a "notepad"-like program over an IDE? As Duckington said, an IDE has numerous features, while the former is just a word-processing program.

Just curious, I'm not bashing text-editors

[jon.kiparsky]

BBuschRN, on 02 April 2012 - 01:51 PM, said:

Sorry, but why would you consider using a "notepad"-like program over an IDE? As Duckington said, an IDE has numerous features, while the former is just a word-processing program.

Just curious, I'm not bashing text-editors

I have no idea why anyone would use anything like notepad, but a proper editor is the right tool for editing. Why you'd want a dedicated (and substandard) editor for writing code is beyond me, even if it has some added features that duplicate the ones that are already available from your command line. (ie, build tools, repository access, etc)

To me, using an IDE indicates that either you don't know how to use your OS or that your OS doesn't work right. In the latter case, I suppose an IDE is the second-best choice, and presumably you're only using a broken OS because the first-best choice isn't available to you for some reason. In the former case, I recommend this book (available as a free download) as a starting point.

This post has been edited by jon.kiparsky: 02 April 2012 - 12:19 PM

[Duckington]

jon.kiparsky, on 02 April 2012 - 08:19 PM, said:

BBuschRN, on 02 April 2012 - 01:51 PM, said:

Sorry, but why would you consider using a "notepad"-like program over an IDE? As Duckington said, an IDE has numerous features, while the former is just a word-processing program.

Just curious, I'm not bashing text-editors

I have no idea why anyone would use anything like notepad, but a proper editor is the right tool for editing. Why you'd want a dedicated (and substandard) editor for writing code is beyond me, even if it has some added features that duplicate the ones that are already available from your command line. (ie, build tools, repository access, etc)

To me, using an IDE indicates that either you don't know how to use your OS or that your OS doesn't work right. In the latter case, I suppose an IDE is the second-best choice, and presumably you're only using a broken OS because the first-best choice isn't available to you for some reason. In the former case, I recommend this book (available as a free download) as a starting point.

Well you're obviously far too pro for the rest of us then. But I'll stick to my IDE anyway.

[wordswords]

I use a combination of a shell environment - such as cygwin - and an IDE such as Eclipse. I find some things are much easier using an IDE, and some things (such as recursive greps and find -exec commands) are much better executed in a shell. I don't see why more people don't use the same setup - you get the benefits of both.

[Nikitin]

jon.kiparsky, on 02 April 2012 - 08:19 PM, said:

I have no idea why anyone would use anything like notepad, but a proper editor is the right tool for editing. Why you'd want a dedicated (and substandard) editor for writing code is beyond me, even if it has some added features that duplicate the ones that are already available from your command line. (ie, build tools, repository access, etc)

To me, using an IDE indicates that either you don't know how to use your OS or that your OS doesn't work right. In the latter case, I suppose an IDE is the second-best choice, and presumably you're only using a broken OS because the first-best choice isn't available to you for some reason. In the former case, I recommend this book (available as a free download) as a starting point.

Maybe once you try working on a semi-complicated project, you'll realize just how moronic and ignorant your post is.

This post has been edited by Nikitin: 04 April 2012 - 10:33 AM

[jon.kiparsky]

Nikitin, on 04 April 2012 - 12:32 PM, said:

Maybe once you try working on a semi-complicated project, you'll realize just how moronic and ignorant your post is.

Well past semi, baby.

[lordofduct]

jon.kiparsky, on 02 April 2012 - 02:19 PM, said:

BBuschRN, on 02 April 2012 - 01:51 PM, said:

Sorry, but why would you consider using a "notepad"-like program over an IDE? As Duckington said, an IDE has numerous features, while the former is just a word-processing program.

Just curious, I'm not bashing text-editors

I have no idea why anyone would use anything like notepad, but a proper editor is the right tool for editing. Why you'd want a dedicated (and substandard) editor for writing code is beyond me, even if it has some added features that duplicate the ones that are already available from your command line. (ie, build tools, repository access, etc)

To me, using an IDE indicates that either you don't know how to use your OS or that your OS doesn't work right. In the latter case, I suppose an IDE is the second-best choice, and presumably you're only using a broken OS because the first-best choice isn't available to you for some reason. In the former case, I recommend this book (available as a free download) as a starting point.

Well considering that the GNU definition of an operating system is the kernel combined with a set of software... of which not all software is required and can be customized. And seeing as an IDE IS software, that is optional. Then an operating system that has software available in the form of an IDE, then we've got exactly what you're describing.

Really, what is an IDE? But all the tools one usually uses to develop, integrated together (hence the name). And if your 'software selection' primarily does the same things that the IDE does, really where is the line dividing the two?

Oh, I know where the line is. It's the idea with some *nix fans that you shouldn't have one large piece of software, and instead several small pieces of software that work together (there is several reasons for this, which are both valid and debatable). Although technically my IDE IS several smaller pieces of software working together, just with a larger parent piece of software inter-connecting them.

Aside from that, there really is no difference. Your development environment does ALL the same things mine does... it's not like yours has extra features mine doesn't have, and vice versa. And in the case that one does, we both can easily locate a tool to facilitate that need if we feel we need it.


So in the end, OUR operating systems facilitate OUR need to develop through multiple sets of software out there that we may choose from.




I've developed in Windows, OSX, Solaris, and multiple flavors of linux... as well as proprietary operating systems some of you never heard of, and are rather outdated in some cases. Each have had varying quality in tools available, not one really weighing out the best in the end, though certainly some being the worst (the PICK OS is quite honestly horrendous to code in).

This post has been edited by lordofduct: 04 April 2012 - 12:41 PM

[jon.kiparsky]

Yo, dawg, I heard you like integrated environments so I integrated an integrated environment in your integrated environment...

Your development environment does ALL the same things mine does... it's not like yours has extra features mine doesn't have, and vice versa.

The argument you're making is interesting, but I think you're missing the point, and I think it's the same point the emacs developers missed. To the degree your IDE succeeds, it only succeeds in replicating existing functionality. Eventually, your IDE, like emacs, becomes a shell. And because it was never intended to be a shell, it does most of what the shell does for you, poorly. The situation reminds me of Greenspun's Tenth Rule, really.

If you understand the basic tools provided by any compliant OS, including a real editor, you already know how to do everything that your IDE does for you. You can use the same toolset to manage a web server, format a textbook, perform lexicographic analysis on a text corpus , or analyze tunes in a collection and try to come up with a grammar of fiddle tunes.

In other words, the native toolset of the posix-compliant CLI is an inherently more powerful and more flexible environment for development, as well as any other form of text manipulation you might engage in, than anything else you'll find implemented.

So no, I don't think they're equivalent at all.