Pizentios

i'd like to think that's why somebody invented reusable code. I personally have several objects that i coded long ago that i still use to this date. My development time on several types of projects (ie: web based, perl scripting) has droped since i first started doing it, because of reusing code...yet i still use vim (or gvim). It saves time to put useful code into functions/classes so it can be reused. Just think how fast I could be if I used an IDE with reused code!!!

sadly, like i sad last post, i won't use a IDE. My main reasons are:
1) Many IDE's don't space the code how i like it (ie 3 space tabs instead of 5)
2) I do alot of linux work where there is no gui, so many of the boxes i code on don't have IDE's. I know i could code the script/program on my desktop and upload it, but what happens when i want to work somewhere else than my office, or have to work on a system remotely across the country?
3) i have yet to find anything as powerful as vim.

__________________
Profanity is the one language that all programmers understand.

Check out my Blog <---updated Nov 30 2007!

_James_

Its a matter of preference really. Some (usually older) people like to use emacs and the command line to do stuff and others like a feature rich IDE. The university i go to gives you the choice of what to use so most people try to learn Visual Studio and netbeans. The problem with this is people get bogged down in learning the IDE as well as the programming language.

Some people think that by using a text editor and command line to write software makes them more of a programmer than others. The funny thing is these people have the least understanding of the language and are usually poorer programmers.

Personally I like emacs and use it for C and Assembly programming but when it comes to C++ and java the use of an IDE is a much wiser idea. Its just the case of using the right tool for the job in hand.

Pizentios

i tend to disagree with that comment. i have a very good understanding of the languages i use on a daily bases. yet i use vim to code in. i know several others like me, many of them are members here, they all have a good understanding of the languages they use.

Bottom line is, your understanding is not effected by what editor/IDE you use. It's effected by how much effort you put into learing the language and how offten you use it in real world applications. When you learn a new programming language you are basically trying to cultivate a new skill. To make something a skill, first you must have the right additude (i will learn this), then you must gain knowledge, then you must practise it, then it becomes a skill.

__________________
Profanity is the one language that all programmers understand.

Check out my Blog <---updated Nov 30 2007!

_James_

I was not directly refering to people who use text editors, i was refering to people who think that by using a text editor they were better programmers than anyone else when usually its not the case. There is a class of programmers that think that by taking the hardest route to getting something done (not that using a text editor is any harder than an IDE) makes them better some how. There is a perception amongst younger people that anything that is not point and click is too hard, slow and old and therefore is no point in trying to learn or use it. Its just an observation I have made, not that it really matters.

Its a bit like by saying that if you dirve a manual car you are a better driver becuase its harder than an automatic. Some people like manuals and some people like automatics, it does not matter what you prefer as both will help you get from A to B.

grumpy

Ah, yes. Someone who can drive a manual can drive an automatic. The reverse is not true without a learning curve.

Most people who manage to learn to use a text editor and a makefile with command line compiler for non-trivial work have no trouble moving over to an IDE. Similarly, most people who use an IDE for non-trivial work have no trouble moving over to a text editor, makefile, and command line compiler. People who only do trivial stuff with either will not have enough knowledge to do anything useful, whether they use a text editor or an IDE. In my experience, people who only ever use "point and click" tend to be pretty unproductive until they learn there is much more to computing.

Arevos

It's also somewhat slower. Hitting "dd" to remove a line (well, cut a line), and then "p" to paste it somewhere is a very quick way of moving lines around. It's very precise, and requires very little effort or thought.

Another plus is that one can combine the delete function with any movement or matching function. For instance, "%" finds the next matching bracket, so "d%" removes the next matching bracket pair. Good for moving functions around.

The only problems with Vim is that one has to take the time to learn a fair few basic commands in order to use it effectively, and it can't integrate with your favourite IDE.

Narue

>It's also somewhat slower.
Not enough to be a good argument.

__________________
Even if the voices aren't real, they have some pretty good ideas.

Arevos

Try it sometime. Like most computer users, the most common way for me to move chunks of text around is the classic select-cut-paste with the cursor and keyboard. In fact, it's still the primary method I use. However, when I'm using Vim, I tend to use the "d" command more than I use the mouse to select, despite being more used to the latter.

I guess part of it may be subjective. It feels snappier, and takes up less of my brain's attention, and I don't have to move my left hand off the keyboard. I dislike swapping from keyboard to mouse; it interrupts my rhythm, which is why I prefer editors like Vim which allow me to carry out complex operations through the keyboard, often faster and more accurately than I could do with a mouse.

To be honest, it wasn't really an argument. I was just explaining why I personally prefer Vim's commands over mouse-driven operation.

Narue

>Try it sometime.
Unlike most computer users, I have a lot of experience with the text-based methods, including vi and emacs at various advanced levels that even vi and emacs snobs tend not to have attempted. I'm often called a keyboard junkie by my co-workers. Keep in mind that when I offer an opposing point, I'm at least as expert as you are with the thing being opposed.

>I guess part of it may be subjective.
Most things are. But claiming that an IDE is substandard because it lacks your favorite implementation of a feature borders on ignorance. Though I can write that off as lack of experience writing text editors in both text-oriented and mouse-oriented environments.

__________________
Even if the voices aren't real, they have some pretty good ideas.

Arevos

Er, so why were you disagreeing with me? Is it that you think selecting a line of text is no harder than typing "dd"? Or because you think that the time saved is trivial?

You make it sound as if you prefer text-based methods, but then seem to argue against that preference. I'm honestly rather confused at what point you are trying to make.

Wait, what?

Your answers can get somewhat confusing at times, as I'm not sure whether you're applying them to me, or to someone else entirely. You initially appear to be replying to something I said, but since I haven't claimed that an IDE is substandard because it lacks a certain implementation of a feature, you veer off into unexplored territory. Who are you talking about?

I did say that I considered some IDEs not to be up to standard, but surely that's self-evident. Some IDEs are better than others, so clearly one will set their personal standards by the best IDE they've tried.