Re: [dwm] Coding styles

From: pancake <pancake_AT_youterm.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 18:00:23 +0200

On Thu, 2008-07-31 at 17:28 +0200, Kai Gro├čjohann wrote:
> I don't understand why IDEs are considered so bad.
>
> IDEs make it easy to shoot yourself in the foot (by clicking with the
> mouse, no less). But all C programmers know that it works to just avoid
> shooting yourself in the foot. Also, there may be bad IDEs.
>
> I use Eclipse for Java programming, with viPlugin.

im some bad times of my life i have been using eclipse with a home-made
crack for viplugin. I can look for it if you want.

BTW, I never understood why viplugin is proprietary, paysoft and full of
bugs. Its just anoying to have to pay for that so bad implementation.

I have used javascript implementations for replacing textareas in webs
emulating vi with more features than viplugin and for free.

> Regarding lock-in: Our build infrastructure is based on make, and I
> integrated Eclipse and the build infrastructure. This means all
> projects can be built using make. There is no lock-in. (In fact, some
> team members prefer Emacs, and some use vi. We all collaborate on the
> same projects.)

Yeah, eclipse is a very standard tool. Using ANT is far more better than
using make. IMHO make is also a weird tool that should be replaced
anytime. Current GNU implementation is full of unnecessary stuff and it
highly depends on the shell so, it breaks portability.

> Regarding power of the editor: With viPlugin, I get enough basic editor
> functionality so that I do not feel restrained. Yet, the Eclipse Java
> editor knows Java syntax and offers a much higher level of source code
> editing. Specifically, we have refactoring and quickfix support, and
> code completion and navigation.

I miss lot of functionalities. And the bugs on it makes sometimes loss
time trying to fail into insert mode.

> Quickfix means that the editor recognizes common compilation problems
> and offers corrections. I use that to speed up typing: I say String x =
> someObject.someMethod(someArg);, then wait for the editor to flag the
> compilation error, then let it correct the type of x. This means that I
> don't have to remember the exact type that someMethod returns, and also
> I get the import statement for free.

My guidelines are mostly based on C, I know that coding for

btw you can do all the same stuff inside vim with code autocompletion
(there is an elcipse backend for vim), syntax highlighting, automatic
indentation, etc..

I wrote some shellscript to replace all these features from the
commandline to get list of methods, find strings on source files,
enable/disable debug printfs, etc.. Most of these features are easy to
implement in the shell and give you more control on the source than
using the common user interfaces for code autocompletion and so.

But I understand that maybe I'm a big freak on this. I'm just offering
my POV over these topics. not trying to change the mind of anybody or
anything else :)

--pancake
Received on Thu Jul 31 2008 - 16:00:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Thu Jul 31 2008 - 16:12:04 UTC