FOSDEM Interviews On Free Development Tools 102
FOSDEM writes "The Free and Open Source Software Developers' European Meeting folks, aka FOSDEM, have just released the second part of their speakers' interviews. These interviews are dedicated to their development tools track, with Andreas Zeller for ddd, Benoit Minisini for Gambas and Alexander Dymo & Harald Fernengel for kdevelop. Previous interviews were already discussed on Slashdot here"
C++ autocomplete... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:4, Insightful)
The general problem is that those are usually built by true experts, that is people who know their programming inside out. The tools are built to "scratch a personal itch" thus they are generally very powerfull but not so userfriendly.
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:5, Informative)
maybe i'm blowing smoke out my ass (puff puff) but it seems like you can get 80% of that just by using vim. let's look at the feature list from visual assists website:
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:5, Insightful)
Wast majority of people doing any sort of programming in the world are quite frankly not that good. Thus they need easy, preconfigured tools that will help them do the basically simple things they have to do, but that seem so difficult and intimidating to them.
Re:C++ autocomplete...Gambas. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:2)
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:5, Insightful)
What a crock.
If "having easy, preconfigured tools that will help me do the basically simple thing I need to do" makes someone dumb/lazy/whatever, sign me up.
I don't want tools that could do something, or that can be tweaked to do something, or that can do something if you add other tools. I want tools that do what I want, right now.
Saying that those tools nearly exist, or can exist with some work, is saying that the DO NOT exist - only it makes it sound better to some OS folks.
(lover of jEdit, gnumake, etc)
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:2)
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:2)
And to me that just sounds like more apologist crap. I like to think I'm a good programmer, and I tear my hair out witho
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:2)
When I was in graduate school, and learning about things like genetic algorithms, or implementing a distributed file system, I needed operational tools now. I had to design and implement some pretty hardcore software in a matter of weeks. This is the kind of case where any/all help that my tools can provide is welcome, as I tended to be more focused on design. However, if the proper implementation tools are not redily available and usable, they might as well not exist at all.
~D
Use Power Tools After Hand Tools (Score:2)
I had to design and implement some pretty hardcore software in a matter of weeks. This is the kind of case where any/all help that my tools can provide is welcome, as I tended to be more focused on design. However, if the proper implementation tools are not redily available
[I'll probably sound like a crusty old SOB, but here it is:], one of the reasons that turbocharged software development tools get a bad rap is because they are used too quickly by novice programmers (I'm not implying you or anyone else
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:1)
If you're going to be a professional software developer, you should invest some time in your tools. As you use a tool like vim, over time you build up a bunch of personalized settings, shortcuts, key mappings, etc. that is perfectly suited to the way you work. These go into one or two text config files.
Once you have that, you ca
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:2)
While I agree that a professional software developer should expect to spend some time configuring their tools, and investing time into making them as efficient as they can be, I don't think that many developers have very different needs.
"everyone wants":
Syntax coloring
Indenting
Word Completion (+ more (blocks, etc))
Macros
OO coders want:
Class browser
Method completion (+ constructors, etc)
Have I miss
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:2)
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:5, Insightful)
Being an effective programmer often means picking up new tools. As these new tools inevitably come with reams of new functions / objects etc. Having a powerful editor flattens the learning curve greatly. How much quicker is it to become productive in a New language when you have autocomplete?
btw: the point of this message is not 'difficult and itimidating', the point is 'getting the job done'. If having imperfect memory means 'frankly not being good', then welcome to the human race, mate.
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:2)
All too often, Bob will find himself using autocomplete to see if a funciton in the list looks like what he wants to do. He has no idea how to do this task, but look - there is a function that sounds like it does what he wants. Forget that it may or may not do this task exactly, and forget that the documentation for the function may specify pre-conditions and post-conditions and other requirements... what
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:2)
We are not talking about average joe, these people are *programmers*. Maybe you wouldn't expect all of them to be able to implement an editor from scratch, but managing a simple vimrc file?
That said, i have yet to see a preconfigured "easy-to-use" editor that can match the functionality of good old vim. My question is "Are there any programming tools that offer the functionality of traditional editors in a more userfri
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:1)
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:1)
Wast majority of people doing any sort of programming in the world are quite frankly not that good. Thus they need easy, preconfigured tools that will help them do the basically simple things they have to do, but that seem so difficult and intimidating to them.
I don't think that only junior programmers need user friendly tools. The less you need to think about the tool, the more brain power you have left for the real problem you are trying to solve. This is why tools such as Whole Tomato's Visual Assist
There is no remotely decent Open Source completion (Score:3, Interesting)
That vim auto-completion stuff is *extremely* primitive. It's just autocompletion of keywords basically. VC++/VA have full blown language based auto-completion. That means they actually have a complete parser for the C++ language, which is by no means an easy thing to do. A "syntax file" is just matching regular expressions (a glorified grep) and isn't doing any real parsing of the l
Re:There is no remotely decent Open Source complet (Score:2)
Re:There is no remotely decent Open Source complet (Score:1)
Anjuta does have some autocomplete for C, but it is nowhere close to VisualAssist support for C++.
Re:There is no remotely decent Open Source complet (Score:2)
Re:There is no remotely decent Open Source complet (Score:2)
Re:There is no remotely decent Open Source complet (Score:1)
KDevelop's autocomplete is better than in other OpenSource IDEs but it's still far behind VisualAssist (yes, I did check it).
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:2, Interesting)
For example, VAssist correctly understands smart pointers, template parameters, partial template specialization and functors. No other tool can do it (yes, I did look at VIM and emacs).
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:2)
I'm sure Visual Assist is a fine tool that is very useful to you, but if you try to compa
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes you can if you a) set up Vim properly and b) use ctags and TList whenever you can.
Beacause Visual Assist is aware of the syntax of C/C++/VB/C#... and acts accordingly.
Check.
For example, it can diffrentiate between local can globalr variables.
Check.
When you use it with existing libraries with source (like Boost for example), it will parse the whole thing and now Suggestion lists and spell checker will be aware of the new functions, m
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:3, Insightful)
"Patterns you use" indicates it's just doing pattern matching, not understanding the language.
The gp wrote that paragraph - not me. You arguing for me?
Uncheck, it can't parse C++.
ctags can parse C++ just fine.
1. Do you actually code in C++?
Yes - got a current project of about 20 000 lines tha
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:2)
There is far more to auto-completion than variable/function names. Does ctags allow vi to generate a tooltip with the function arguments listed - I can't find it in the docs. Not having to look up or remember every function declaration is extremely useful. Was that function "short int do_something(short int number_of_time,short int size)" or "int do_something(int size,int number_of_times)".
Having a C++ parser in the compiler isn't that much use while typing. Source code is highly structured, why not use a
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:2)
Don't know about tooltips since I normally don't use the mouse but it's dead easy to jump to any declaration and jump
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:2)
Yeah I know. The gp was asking about vim and I assumed he meant gvim (which is what I use) and the normal pop-up style tooltips you get in gtk+. Tooltips in gtk+ require the mouse pointer to be left over a widget that can receive events - hence my comment about the mouse. Try reading what I've said. I'm perfectly aware of how VA tooltips work. Very nifty actually and I believe Vim 7 is going to get them along with some form of Intellisense.
You have no place
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:1)
To clear up any misconceptions: There is more than one definition of the word pattern. The OP was talking about VAs heuristic behavior, where (for example) if you call Foo.Bar() a whole lot, the method Bar will
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:2)
Emacs has a pretty simple yet effective heuristic for its dabbrev expansion: it goes backward from the point for the most recent expansion candidate. Thus what you expanded most recently will be what's expanded first. It's pretty simple-minded, but it's actually quite useful. What's great about it is that it expands anything at all without
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:2)
I just realized I'm coming off as a total fanboy in my posts :P I'm not associated w
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:1)
ctags only parses part of C++, it's not complete. Mostly it's just a C parser witha little bit tacked on.
Yes and I don't like it. Perhaps my bias has come through in my previous reply. I find my productivity with vim much higher than with vc++ and intellisense/code completion. This is the real problem with my previous post actually - not being upfront and saying "I find vc++ code-completion annoying and counter-productive IMHO for these reasons."
So then you admit that i
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:2)
Sure but I just did. Nothing wrong with admitting your original premise was incorrect. As I said pretty clearly, I shouldn't have compared vim and VA directly, rather said "I prefer the way vim does it for these reasons."
Are you going to admit everything you said about me was incorrect as well? I thought not...
Glad to see you don't like the other extra functionality too.
The reason is much simpler: I don't have to co
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:1)
1)Deprive you of an open community who shares code-level relities of programming
2) Deprive you of an understanding of how libraries you use are implemented
3) Make debugging the &*(^iest experience that you can ever imagine
4) Force you to buy things just to be creative
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:2)
The completion in Emacs and Vi is far less advanced - it just selects from a list of matching terms. No list, no information and if I mispell a member, I get no indication, the auto-complete just starts selecting random matching symbols f
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:2)
You could probably implement muc
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:2)
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:2)
Big Brother / Little Brother (Score:2)
Advogato. Check it! [advogato.org] Not exacly "apprentice" but appears somewhat related in nature.
[ mission statement [advogato.org] ]
[ trust [advogato.org] ]
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:1)
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:1)
But adding correct C++ autocomplete is a HUGE task, I can't do it alone in any reasonable time.
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:1)
Maybe better to get basic features working first (Score:2, Insightful)
Also it's quite difficult to implement. I see many opensource projects spending huge amounts of efforts trying to implement these trendy features and then they leave basic things like usability and debugging support half finished
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:1)
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:1)
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:1)
Re:C++ autocomplete... (Score:1)
Re:Ok, let me guess (Score:1, Offtopic)
Re:Gambas Goodies? (Score:1, Funny)
Sure, but does... (Score:1)
New IDE (Score:5, Interesting)
Take also a look at Widestudio (Score:2, Informative)
Re:New IDE (Score:2)
Any other approaches to developing for Apache on Windows without having to pay for development tools would be great to know about.
Re:New IDE (Score:1)
Re:New IDE (Score:2)
Re:New IDE (Score:2)
Re:New IDE (Score:2)
Bison (Score:2)
Holler for old-skool compilers =P
Re:Bison (Score:2)
About smart editors (Score:5, Interesting)
Now I love vim, but mostly because of its keybindings and not because I think it's really a great program. It and Emacs are terminal programs at their heart, no matter what kind of guis you slap on the front-end.
I've always like IDEs. I don't care about any false machoness about only using Vi or Emacs in the Unix world. You, as a developer, are a user too and the computer should be there to do the mundane stuff that you shouldn't be doing manually anyway. Just think if you didn't have ctags or etags and had to manually grep through source to find stuff. A pain in the ass.
Now something like Visual Slickedit is nice because it can do refactoring and actually understands C++, but will cost you about $300 or more. That's fine for us commercial developers, but maybe not for the hobbyist. KDevelop 3.x, after the long rewrite, has finally got a somewhat functional C++ parser for it, but you have to bring in most of KDE to use it. Eclipse has a C++ parser, but then you have a dependancy on java and it's not so lightweight.
My point is, if GCC was modularized then we might have had a lightweight editor/IDE that had a deep understanding of C++ to do cool stuff like Visual Assist does. Just look at what Eclipse or IDEA does for Java developers.
I want to express my design in source and would rather have the development environment do some of the drudgery, menial work for me.
Things have improved in recent years, but I still think that windows has a leg up on the number and quality of development tools.
I now await the "ed is the only editor a real programmer needs" responses.
Re:About smart editors (Score:3, Informative)
The only problem I found with both Kdevelop and Annjuta was that they didn't cope well with annotated function declarati
Re:About smart editors (Score:1)
Vim/Vi has been ported to every platform under the sun, so I always know that no matter what platform I'm on I'll have at least that.
By the way, Anjuta 2.0 is just around the corner (later on this month I believe). Let's hope it comes with a decent parser. http://www.anjuta.org/wiki/index.php/Anjuta2 [anjuta.org]I've never really understood why Gnome people haven't put more emphasis on creating a top-notch IDE like the KDE folks have.
Re:About smart editors (Score:2)
Vim/Vi has been ported to every platform under the sun,
I know - someone even offered to hire me to port Vim to PalmOS a while back. I turned them down, but it would have been funny to see people trying to type Vi commands with a stylus.
Re:About smart editors (Score:1)
But, I would argue that windows trails far behind in other development tool areas - tools like valgrind and oprofile. On the win32 projects I work with, I would trade visual studio for mingw any day if that meant I c
I would love to see a good C++ refactoring tool (Score:1)
I have tried Borland's Together but would love to see something cheaper and more "integrable" into popular IDEs.
Re:I would love to see a good C++ refactoring tool (Score:3, Interesting)
I know that visual slickedit has it (proprietary - somewhat expensive), but i'm not aware of any other editor/IDE that can.
I know that http://cedet.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net] for emacs can do intellisense type stuff, but not sure about refactoring.
I wouldn't be surprised to see the Eclipse CDT plugin project get it eventually.
I
SharpDevelop (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.icsharpcode.net/OpenSource/SD/ [icsharpcode.net]
Works pretty well for me....
Re:SharpDevelop (Score:2)
I tried out this open source IDE for C# on a fairly large project built using VS.NET and the results were that it was way too slow. It's pretty good for small projects, though.
Hello.. Eclise, Netbeans!! (Score:3, Interesting)
Smalltalk (Score:3, Insightful)