Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.development.apps > #380

Re: IDE's

Show all headers | View raw

On 09/01/12 11:55, Ersek, Laszlo wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Jan 2012, Bill M wrote:
>
>> So you wouldn't recommend Eclipse because it's a little on the bulky
>> side? Or does it have other, less than redeeming, qualities?
>
> Just last night I've heard Eclipse is perfect for Java, and flaky for C.
> When I used it before, it occurred with proprietary plugins (proprietary
> language, proprietary visual designer), and it was about the worst UI
> experience of my life. Everything was wrong about it; the
> uninterruptible builds, the missing dependency tracking (or discovery)
> for incremental builds, the horrible allocation of screen real estate,
> losing recent changes when saving buffers to files (!!!) during
> background parsing, and so on.
>
> I also used it briefly for pure Java builds & source browsing, and it
> was unbearably slow.
>
> You might want check this out:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_integrated_development_environments
>
>
> Laszlo

Be wary of judging Eclipse by the quality (or lack thereof) of 
proprietary plugins - or even of open source plugins.

If you haven't tried Eclipse recently, then it may be time to go back to 
it.  I used to find it very big, slow and bulky, with little clear idea 
of what was going on.  These days it is much more efficient (partly 
because PC's are faster, partly because JVM's are faster, but also in 
fact because Eclipse is faster).  I have used a number of versions, and 
have seen significant improvements and extra features with each major 
version - from about 3.4 onwards it has been quite usable.  I use it 
mostly for C, with some C++, some Python, and some LaTeX.

Builds are interruptible, dependency tracking is okay (with support for 
parallel make in recent versions), parsing is much faster and more 
reliable than with older versions, and the screen real estate is 
reasonably configurable.  It is not perfect, of course - personally I 
usually prefer my own makefiles to Eclipse project manager (I get better 
dependency tracking, and faster incremental builds that way).  But as 
IDEs go, it is good.

Back to comp.os.linux.development.apps | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

IDE's Bill M <wpmccormick@just_about_everywhere.com> - 2012-01-07 14:51 -0600
  Re: IDE's "Ersek, Laszlo" <lacos@caesar.elte.hu> - 2012-01-07 22:06 +0100
    Re: IDE's Bill M <wpmccormick@just_about_everywhere.com> - 2012-01-08 10:12 -0600
      Re: IDE's "Ersek, Laszlo" <lacos@caesar.elte.hu> - 2012-01-08 18:12 +0100
        Re: IDE's Bill M <wpmccormick@just_about_everywhere.com> - 2012-01-08 21:19 -0600
        Re: IDE's Bill M <wpmccormick@just_about_everywhere.com> - 2012-01-08 21:45 -0600
          Re: IDE's "Ersek, Laszlo" <lacos@caesar.elte.hu> - 2012-01-09 11:55 +0100
            Re: IDE's Bill M <wpmccormick@just_about_everywhere.com> - 2012-01-09 13:29 -0600
              Re: IDE's Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-01-09 19:47 +0000
            Re: IDE's David Brown <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no> - 2012-01-09 20:30 +0100
      Re: IDE's Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-01-08 18:49 +0000
        Re: IDE's Bill M <wpmccormick@just_about_everywhere.com> - 2012-01-08 21:53 -0600
      Re: IDE's Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2012-01-09 15:15 +0000
        Re: IDE's ufo22940268@gmail.com - 2012-02-18 06:22 -0800

csiph-web