Posix vs. Windows

Mehrdad wfunction at hotmail.com
Sat May 19 00:45:20 PDT 2012


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...)




More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list