On 03/03/2017 10:40 AM, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d wrote:
IDEs, vastly more supportive, useful software development functionality
than editors, especially for debugging, yes.
It's that last one, the one about getting working software developed
faster, that is the one that has moved me away from Emacs to IDEs. But
Perhaps ironically, I used to be big on IDE's (back before the bloat).
But between the bloat that started happening to them about 10+ years
ago, and various factors that led me to (oddly enough) actually prefer
printf debugging, I switched to more basic editors with the whole "Linux
is my IDE" setup.
everyone to their own, there is no universal truth in this arena.
Definitely true.
But I do really wish though, that the IDE devs would start prioritizing
efficiency, UI snappiness, and startup time. Yea, those toold do more,
but they don't do THAT much more that would technologically necessitate
THAT much of a performance discrepancy. (The plain-old-editors are far
more capable than I think IDE users seem to beleive).
Those IDE efficiency improvements certainly wouldn't hurt their users,
and it would cause less of a "cascading bloat" effect - where devs feel
that have to always have top-of-the-line hardware (because that's what
their IDE demands), so then they get accustomed to how their software
runs on top-of-the-line hardware, so their software winds up bloated
too, and they become so familiar with all of that, they they can't
comprehend why any user would ever be using less than top-of-the-line
hardware and develop disinterest and even disdain for users who aren't
just as computing-gearhead as they are (because they've allowed
themselves to become too far removed from the world of average Joe user).
