Re: [ide-dev] Java IDEs comparison

[Dawid Pakuła <zulus@xxxxxxxxx>]

My 5 cent: consistency, consistency and again consistency...

Problems that I always hear from IDEA/Neatbeans fan’s. I know that lot’s of them are already on bugzilla.

1. Language-specific perspective is a horrible idea as they mostly replace Project Explorer  by <Language_Name> Explorer, simplify “New” menu, overwrite default ctrl/cmd+shift+t and add couple tabs to bottom area. For me Java/RAP/PHP/CDT in future could have by default only two perspectives opened: Resource (please rename it) and Debug.

2. Madness in “New” wizard first page. Netbeans/IDEA have strong separation between creating project and file (any other element)

3. Working sets, one of most powerfull thing in eclipse isn’t widely supported across projects, examples:

3.1. “Window Working Set” entry sometimes isn’t available in fast view menu (Platform views), sometimes is (JDT school based views)

3.2. Working sets types not always available between views, for example still is not possible to import existing project into mylyn working set directly

4. Lot’s of problems and incositency between editors. Eclipse 4.7 may bring a hope ;)

5. Lack of suport for in-languages (SQL, template engines, etc...). Writing support for them across file types is mostly immpossible becuase most editors haven’t generic (any) support for color and assist extensions. 

6. Freezing UI during CA. Still may happen, especially if extension need access to web during CA and something goes wrong. Bugzilla record pending since years.

-- 
Dawid Pakuła

From: Carsten Reckord <reckord@xxxxxxxx>
Reply: Discussions about the IDE <ide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 7 September 2016 at 17:38:39
To: Discussions about the IDE <ide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject:  Re: [ide-dev] Java IDEs comparison

> It's surprising how the code completion of IntelliJ (checking target type,
> frequency of calls, chain completion...) is still listed as better than
> the one in Eclipse IDE. Wasn't Code Recommender providing that in all
> Java-based packages?

I don't have empirical evidence, just my subjective impression, but one problem with completion that I frequently encounter in Eclipse and that IJ seems to get better is the local context that I'm working in. If there are a dozen proposals for the current completion, we often don't have to look as far as global frequency, chains and all that:

Just prefer the type that is already imported in the current class over the one that isn't, the type or variable that I've used in the line just above where I'm asking for completion over other applicable ones, the method in my current class over some external type proposal, etc.

> Also, it's strange that IJ is congratulated for its "Polyglot
> development", where the Eclipse ecosystem has a much better offering. The
> reason is probably that people compare IDEs as they're shipped, not
> ecosystem.

In general, the IJ people shine in two "polyglot" areas here:

1. Consistency: editors and tools look and work the same across languages, whereas there are many (small but annoying) UX differences between different editors and language scopes in Eclipse.
2. Cross-Language features: I haven't tried this in Neon, but before, navigating between artifacts of different languages, getting usages etc was just way more seamless in IJ.

But I hope with the new extensible editors and the language server initiative this is about to improve dramatically :)


_______________________________________________
ide-dev mailing list
ide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ide-dev