Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit | stephenr's comments login

> There's one thing I really hate about coding and that is getting my environment up and synced

Keep the IDE's config between reinstalls/new machines? Some IDEs even have a specific option to export the config and import it into another instance.

How about developing where WAN speed is not brilliant or the connection is unreliable.

Honestly this would be like saying "GitHub doesn't accept git pushes anymore, all changes to files have to be made through the Web UI".

Remote/Pair programming is a feature of several desktop IDEs.

https://pingability.com has a free plan that will test once per hour if thats often enough for you. $10 a month will give you once every 5 minutes.

Filling a 30" screen with crap for the sake of filling it is hardly good "utilisation".

And filling a 30" screen with 200 character code lines because 80 character limits were only for the 800x600 days isn't good utilization either.

Thus you display multiple source files next to each other, or maybe some metadata. More screens should mean more relevant information.

I'd typically rather have more information about the file I'm currently working on rather than a bunch of different files open. When I'm using a text editor I'll want multiple text windows, but that's because navigation between files is much harder in that environment.

One can also have multiple views on one file (at least Emacs can) which is another good for having multiple buffers side-by-side instead of one single buffer.

And eclipse lets you do just that.

I think this is unfortunately why people get a bad idea about an IDE.

I don't want a tab or button for everything. I want to primarily write text (i.e. code) but I also want it to be intelligent about what I'm writing - i.e. I want the autocomplete, the parameter hinting, the type checking (i.e. can't use the result of a void method, or can't do string ops on an array etc). I also want the option to have refactor helpers (moving methods, renaming methods, changing argument order, etc).

I've found IDEA (and before that PhpStorm, but it supports less plugins) are generally able to meet that need but you have to be careful about which plugins you install. I want Lua support, that doesn't mean I want a Lua console button in all projects.

You should have a look at QtCreator which follows a minimal IDE philosophy. The only downside is that it's only for C++.

Most IDEs can thankfully be trimmed down to look like QtCreator.

I daily write in Xcode and that is very slimmed-down. In fact, Visual Studio developers typically hate it on first using it because there is only editors on the screen as opposed to property panes both sides of the editor!

And I would say that it is ONLY C++ is truly a benefit to QtCreator!! No use trying to be everything to everyone. Plus, C++ is the best language for everything isn't it? (I jest, I jest)

I don't write C++ or even C, so I doubt that's going to work.

Unfortunately the only IDE's which seem to support languages I use and work on OS X are java based, and it seems the best option is IDEA or one of it's siblings.

But eclipse (and I'm sure others) used to allow you to hide most of the stuff, is the problem just the initial perception?

That's true. E.g., this is my Eclipse setup: http://i.imgur.com/SP6o1W2.png

Customizable? but is it easy? Is there a drag'n'drop for the toolbar buttons? Can the fonts for menus and panel titles be downsized easily?

Also, Eclipse tends to try to do everything in their IDE: Transition an issue, commit, execute a command-line program, browse the database, etc. It's a very different spirit from, say, SublimeText where each program is dedicated to one thing well. It has a lot of impact on the UI, hence the critics "Code is 40% of my screen". I personally prefer IDEA now because it comes with thin shims.

Btw, the HN rules say "No negativity". Just a reminder to be considerate for the Eclipse team.

> Eclipse tends to try to do everything in their IDE

Isn't that the whole point of an IDE? I mean, an Integrated Development Environment, by definition, should have all the tools integrated, as opposed to a text editor which is only one tool in an unintegrated development environment.

I prefer Emacs myself, but if I wanted an IDE, I'd probably go for the one that can do everything I want to do.

Other comments say they prefer the axiom "IDE==awesome autocompletion" (e.g. LightTable) rather than "IDE==Embed all the tools into one window!".

I have worked in IT services companies. They wrap almost a full OS into Eclipse (or WSAD). They have people who don't have a clue about programming [1], they need to onboard them and they do little to upgrade their knowledge. I used to wonder how architects learnt about Git and Maven, until the day I decided not to use IDE buttons, tried them on the command line and discovered "--help". It's all self-documented, output is all logged, I can debug compilation errors alone!

[1] Recruitment and HR is a cost center for consultancies. At one point they just took graduates from Chemistry major with a mild interest in Excel. Needless to say those who stayed became PMs. I've seen millions of euros from government, banks and insurances thrown into multiplying employees, rather than improving employees.

I suspect there are very few programmers who want to click a Copy button on a toolbar with a mouse. Those sorts of tools should be hidden by default, at the very least.

My comment was related to having all tools built into the IDE rather than using lots of different command line (or other) tools, not to the UI buttons.

From that page I'm confused.

Is this an update of the "traditional" Eclipse IDE, or a new browser based IDE? What does a "workspace server" mean?

Che is a web based IDE from what I have heard. The github site is better organized: https://github.com/codenvy/che

> a web based IDE

This is exactly what I didn't want. Please tell me that this "next generation" stuff is just inaccurate hype, and that this is really just some minor Eclipse offshoot.

It uses the same Eclipse technology, but it isn't the next version of Eclipse. Like Orion, it is an experiment at looking at what a web-based IDE can do.

The existing Eclipse IDE will continue for a long time yet - Eclipse Neon will be released in six months time with full Java 9 support, for example.

The great thing about web based IDE's and the reason we will see more of this in the future is the opportunity for vendor lock in. Once you can control a developers tool chain you can prevent him from moving to another vendor because of all the stuff he can't take with him.

Hosting it myself would be a requirement for using a cloud IDE. Of course, there is still some lock-in, but the lock-in is the same with a desktop IDE.

In general, a cloud IDE has some nice promises: Initial setup is trivial; More efficient building and testing due to resource sharing in the cloud; Live collaboration is simpler. However, so far I'm underwhelmed by everything available.

Both Orion and Che can be run locally (or behind a firewall) without any problems.

> is the opportunity for vendor lock in

Also the fetish for centralized control and tool standardization.

Just imagine: you may soon be developing in a SAP-based IDE, chosen by feature checklist!

It looks to me like it's a web based frontend to Eclipse. I think a 'workspace server' is just a Java server passing messages between the browser and the backend.

The API documentation screenshot is a default of something. I know I've seen that UI with those colours elsewhere.

I believe something equals swagger ui. [0]

[0] http://swagger.io/swagger-ui/

Looks like StrongLoop API Explorer

It's actually swagger. [0] Strongloop uses swagger.

[0] https://github.com/codenvy/che-core/blob/master/platform-api...

Given the mixed technical/non-technical nature, I'd suggest something like Gollum (the thing that powers GitHub's Wiki's) because you can allow both "in-browser" editing and (for the technically minded) local editing via the raw markdown/RST/etc files in a cloned git repo.

To me, Git-LFS and Git-Annex when compared to the Mercurial LargeFiles extension, are perfect examples of what's wrong with Git.

Mercurial's LargeFiles extension allows you to do what I would imagine, 90%+ of Git-LFS users will want to do: store some binary assets with their regular source code.

In Mercurial, the files get stored on the shared server, inside the .hg directory of the repo you clone. They are cached between requests client side, and it generally just works. I had to add 2 lines server side, and 5 lines client side (both times in a hgrc file) to enable and test the functionality.

With Git it seems very much that Git-LFS (rather than Git-Annex) is more like what I need to achieve basically the same results/workflow.

Oh wait, but I need a separate Git-LFS server. So, Git-LFS was created by GitHub, and they of course support Git-LFS on their servers.. But I want to manage this repo on my own machines so what can I do..

Oh look GitHib has a reference implementation of a standalone Git-LFS server.. Oh wait. Second sentence of the Readme is a bit ominous:

> It is intended to be used for testing the Git LFS client and is not in a production ready state.

I'm just using regular SSH access to use my Repos, can't I just access the Git-LFS file store that way? Oh. No. I have to expose a HTTP(S) server that accepts basic auth.. Oh and the Git client needs to be able to provide the Authorisation header automatically so I don't get prompted... Oh and the slightest thing can make the "automatic" mapping of URLS from repo to LFS-store not work, meaning I have to specify it manually...

That Git-LFS comes from GitHub and is relatively complex to setup for hosting, is likely not a coincidence. They make money offering 'easy' repo hosting. Why would they want to make it easier to setup your own repo.

This line from http://git-lfs.github.com really takes the cake though:

> Work like you always do on Git—no need for additional commands, secondary storage systems

So you don't need a secondary storage system... you just need a HTTPS server and Username/Password authentication layer.. but that isn't a secondary system. Just like a Turducken isn't really three birds crammed into one.

Photo stream is meant to let you sync photos between devices - that's why photos get removed automatically.

What you want is regular shared albums.

The upload limits are to do with the number of images you can upload per hour/day/month - they're about the amount of uploaded items not stored items.

There is nothing that I've read that describes what you said.

That said, I have multiple photostreams with almost 1000 photos/videos per photostream, and none have been deleted. So I'm not sure how it's supposed to work, if it is just a sync mechanism. As well, I do know that without an internet connection, the videos don't work, so I'm not sure what "sync" even means in this context.

> There is nothing that I've read that describes what you said.

Literally the second (non-ad) result when I searched on DDG for "apple photostream": https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201317

From that page:

The subheading says: "With My Photo Stream, you can access the recent photos that you take with your iPhone, iPad, or iPod touch, on your Mac and PC."

Under the instructions about setting it up is this:

> My Photo Stream uploads your most recent photos so you can view and import them to all of your devices. Photos are stored in My Photo Stream for 30 days.

I don't know what material you've been reading, but Photostream has always been marketed by Apple as a way to get photos from any of your devices, onto the others. Think of it like a delayed queue. Device A uploads the 5 photos you just took to the photostream. Devices B and C connect later (either because they were off, or had no Wifi, etc) and (depending on your settings) can download those 5 photos. After a month, the photos are automatically deleted from the photo stream.

In the world of iCloud Photo Library, the only reason to keep the "Upload to My Photo Stream" option turned on, is if you have a device that can't use the new Photos app (e.g. older iOS/OSX).

Based on what you're saying about "multiple PhotoStreams" I don't even know what you're doing. Are you sure what you're using is PhotoStreams, and not just regular shared albums? It doesn't sound anything like PhotoStream if you have multiple, long-lived collections.

This is funny. You're right. What I thought were Photostreams are actually iCloud Shared Albums. No wonder I've been so confused. However, they used to be called Photo Streams, I believe. Or at least, they used to be called "streams", which is probably why I conflated the terms. I know they were called streams because I just checked my iPhone 4, which is still on IOS 7.1.2, and it says distinctly "Create New Stream". On IOS 8, it says "Start Sharing". I just never noticed they got rid of the term stream and/or changed the meaning. I can honestly say at this point I don't know what a Photostream is anymore then.

As I said, your Photostream is just the last 30 days of photos from any device said to upload to it. This allows automatic import into other devices, if you aren't using iCloud Photo Library (or if some devices can't use it)

I've definitely had some issues with their iCloud related Photo systems, but the little messing around I've had to do has been worth it for the functionality when they work, IMO.


Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact