On Sun, 12 May 2013 18:35:25 +0200 "Juan Manuel Cabo" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sunday, 12 May 2013 at 03:58:04 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote: > > The nicest thing of all, IMO, about not strictly needing all > > that > > support software is that basic things like > > editing/navigating/opening/closing code is always and forever > > 100% > > unobstructed by things like startup delays and keyboard input > > lag which > > have no business existing on the rocket-engined supercomputers > > we now > > call "a PC". > > I'm using a little known IDE for D known as Poseidon: > http://www.dsource.org/projects/poseidon/wiki/Screenshots > it is very fast, loads very quickly, and the editor is very > responsive. The keyword autocompletion is mostly broken in D2 but > I can live without it. It is a bit sad that it has gone > unmantained for more than a year. > Looks interesting. Now that you mention it, I do seem to recall hearing about it back then. Personally, I've been a huge fan of Programmer's Notepad 2 <http://www.pnotepad.org/>. My #1 complaint about it though is that it's Windows-only. I want to switch to Linux for my primary system, but the lack of PN2 is one of the roadblocks (there are other roadblocks, though). > These are the things that I cannot live without for my big D2 > project: > - Syntax highlighting. > - Search in multiple files. > - Can go to file/line when double-clicking on compiler error. > - Compile/run/debug just by hitting SHIFT-F5, and other keys. Yea, PN2 has all of that. Essential stuff IMO too. > - Tree like structure for navigating all the many source > files of my project. PN2 has that for files, although it looks like Poseidon goes another step further and puts funcs/classes/etc into the tree, too. I heavily use PN2's FF-like QuickFind for that sort of thing. Obviously not as good, but it gets me where I'm going ;) > - Debugging (breakpoints, step by step, go to line that > crashed). It suprisingly still works in Poseidon. Yea, that's something PN2 doesn't have. (Un)Luckily for me, I've spent a lot of time in the past on things where I didn't have a debugger available (one time my only debugging aid was a single LED! Royal PITA!), so I've gotten so accustomed to printf debugging that I find I usually prefer it. Debuggers are great, I'd never deny that, but one thing I love about printf-style is you can trivially go back-and-forth in time just by scrolling. Debuggers only give you one time-slice at a time, and can usually only progress forwards. Of course, printf-style debugging really needs a language that compiles fast. Fine for D, but it's no so fun with C/C++. > - No need for a makefile. It feeds all source files > (hundreds) and libraries to dmd. > I used to swear by Visual Studio (until it got bloated, somewhere around one of the earlier .NET versions) and I loved the whole approach of "no makefiles, just feed all the project files to the compiler". But these days I prefer RDMD-style approaches ("pass the one main source file to a cmdline tool and it figures out the rest") because they're trivially scriptable and don't cause a specific editor (or any editor at all) to become a build requirement. I find that especially important for OSS and cross-platform projects. Ever dealt with automated building of a multi-part project that included building a Visual Studio project or (worse) a Flash project as just one part of the overall process? Blech. It's awful. > For smaller D projects I use Vim/makefiles though. > > Again, I'm a bit sad that it has gone unmantained for so long, > but it's totally usable still. This is the faster IDE that I've > found. > > --jm >
