On Saturday, 19 May 2012 at 06:47:48 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
One day it's bound to happen, though.
Yeah I'd heard about some similar stuff too, waiting to hear
about it.
Substitute "length(" with "size(" instead of just "length" with
"size". Problem solved. :-)
Er, you missed the entire point of my example. :\
Those were PROPERTIES. They are used *without* parentheses. Your
solution doesn't actually work on them. :P
Worse yet, no way in hell that a command-line tool would tell
you your documentation is messed up. :P
Oh yeah? And what about when documentation mentions the old
name of the method? In which case you *want* to rename it. :-)
My answer might suprise you then... you should _REALLY_ try using
a real IDE to get a feel for what I'm talking about.
Eclipse actually _automatically renames_ identifiers inside your
documentation comments.
All it takes is Alt+Shift+R to say you want to rename an
identifier, and it corrects all references _as you type_.
With 100% accuracy, I might add. Unlike the CLI-based solution,
it's NOT a half-baked text-based solution. AFAIK it uses the
syntax tree.
Try doing that in <your-text-editor-here>
:P
I did say it's clunky. But it's also a trivial case that one
quickly learns and remembers how to deal with correctly. :-)
Again, see above.
Your solution fails miserably when you're working with properties
like In my example, since those don't have any parentheses.
Plus, you've to keep in mind that integration with arbitrary
shell commands add a whole new dimension to this that no
Windows-centric IDE can ever hope to achieve.
+1 yes, it's powerful indeed. But they're all text-based.
Editing source code with text-based tools is error-prone. Editing
them with an IDE that uses the syntax tree is not.
Simple as that.
It is possible in theory
key word here :P ^
Thing is, in vim the various movement keys can be applied as
modifiers to a particular action. And because these are logical
entities, not physical positions, the same command can be
applied to vastly different parts of the text and still have
the same logical meaning. That is, 2 paragraphs in this case
may span 6 lines, but in another part of the file it may span 8
lines.
Yes, that's very powerful. But again, it's for *TEXT*, not CODE.
Unless your editor can go "two scopes down and six statements to
the right", what you're saying doesn't really work for code (or
maybe I'm not understanding it right?).
Eeek! On most modern keyboards, PgUp/PgDn, etc., are so far out
of the way that you might as well reach for the mouse.
Lol, 100% correct -- except in my situation. :P
I code on my laptop, and it's Fn+Up and Fn-Down. Home/End are
Fn-Left and Fn-Right.
Takes a little getting used to at the beginning, but it's VERY
handy. :)
Especially compared to ESC, as you mentioned.
Yikes. I wouldn't touch Windows 7 with a 20-foot sterilized
flagpole. XP was the last usable version of Windows in many
senses of the word.
If you haven't used it then you can't really say that now, can
you? (If you're thinking of Vista when you think of 7, FYI it's
on the opposite end of the spectrum from Windows 7. And if you
don't like the looks, you can always switch to an XP-like theme,
like me.)
There's a reason the adoption rate of Windows 7 is
significantly slower than MS would like.
I thought it was doing well?
But yeah I just swallowed your chunk of salt, thanks. :P
Now don't get me wrong, Ubuntu is doing a very good thing in
making Linux accessible to the masses, but frankly, you haven't
_really_ used Linux until you've mastered the command-line and
can regularly compose long chains of pipes that does magical
transformations to data without thinking twice. In my previous
job, there was a part-time contractor who regularly writes
5-line long bash commands complete with subshells, multiple
redirections, obscure sed/grep tricks, AND HAVE IT ALL WORK THE
FIRST TIME ROUND WITHOUT NEEDING TO HIT BACKSPACE EVEN ONCE.
Seriously, the guy just breathes bash command lines like a fish
in water,
My God, how I wish I could do that! :O As much as I'm not a Linux
fan, I still want that ability -- it can be very *very* useful in
quite a few situations!!
it's uncanny. Sometimes you just stare at him compose these
incredibly complex commands and your jaw just drops to the
floor in amazement. Your first thought is "that can't possibly
work! Isn't that a typo right there?! He spelt that option
wrong!" and then the next second, your eyes are popping out of
their sockets, "what the... it WORKED?!?!?!".
I've seen 1 person who did stuff *close* to what you're
describing... and yes, my jaw dropped indeed, so I know what you
mean perfectly. it's... out of this world... x___x
Sufficiently advanced shell commands are indistinguishible from
physics-defying magic. ;-)
+1
(If you've ever had to deal with the monstrosities that are
makefiles for very large (>2 million lines of code) projects,
you'll understand why.)
Spending days on end trying to compile GCC and GDC (and
ultimately failing) was more than enough time wasted for the rest
of my life, so I know perfectly what you mean. xD
You _want_ to use specialized tools for working with it, unless
you're into masochism.
Haha right, that's why I don't really edit XML text directly. xD
Well I applaud your willingness to try. :-)
Thanks, I downloaded GVim a few hours ago. Now to find some time
to learn it haha... it turns me off pretty badly every time I
open it (hell, it doesn't even save my font settings...)
