On Saturday, May 12, 2012 02:00:19 Timon Gehr wrote: > On 05/11/2012 07:39 PM, Paulo Pinto wrote: > > The author of a D based PSP emulator just rewrote > > the emulator in C#, after being disappointed with D. > > > > https://github.com/soywiz/cspspemu > > > > The reasons are listed here, > > > > https://github.com/soywiz/cspspemu#created-after-4-tries > > > > -- > > Paulo > > Well, those are not reasons for me. > > > The lack of a good IDE, > > Properties of a 'good IDE', as I see it: > > some essential properties: > - starts up instantaneously > - uses the screen space efficiently > - supports editing text efficiently > - accepts keyboard input as given by the user. > - reasonable support for auto-indentation > - supports searching the code for some text efficiently > - keeps all code _readable_, especially the one that has been written > recently > - pattern recognition based code completion > > - ... by default! > > some 'nice to have' properties: > - code analysis based code completion > - navigate-to-declaration > - for those languages that require it: automatic generation of boilerplate. > - integrated debugger > - useful refactoring tools > - visualization of compilation errors (but please don't nag me) > - actual support for detecting semantic errors as they happen (extremely > difficult to do properly) > - any other argument that is commonly used to advertise IDEs > > - ... _responsive_ on halfway recent hardware! > > some anti-features: > - splash screen > - cannot run code if there is no 'project/solution file' > - sometimes messes up those files > - build fails - restart IDE - build works > - fancy GUI > - requires pointing device > - accidental hit of obscure keyboard combination ... > => permanent, extremely annoying configuration change > => no way to tell what happened > => no undo operation > - termination of the debugged program kills the output console > > > As long as IDEs fail to satisfy every single point in the 'essential' > category and strive to have all of the stated anti-features, they don't > have much value for me anyway. > > > the complicated structure of the D language, > > Cannot really comment on that, I think getting work done in D is simple, > and with DMD, just slightly harder than that. > > > the horrible compilation times, > > wat? The so-fast-I-could-not-grab-a-coffee-during-compilation kind of > horrible? Otherwise he might have hit a bug there. > > > caused that it taked too much time for everything, and made it > > impossible to refactoring the code without days or weeks of work. > > I'd have to know what kind of refactorings he carried out to be able to > comment on this.
I do have to say that I find it somewhat funny that this is your set of requirements for an IDEA and yet "integrated debugger" is in the "some 'nice to have' features" section. Doesn't an IDE _have_ to have an integrated debugger or it's only a code editor (since it lacks the whole integrated part of Integrated Development Environment). - Jonathan M Davis
