News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Microsoft Open Sources C# Compiler by keypusher on Thursday April 03, 2014 @05:45PM (#7527105)
Is Visual Studio auto-complete significantly different from IntelliJ or Eclipse? There are many great editors an the continium between gedit and Visual Studio, such as Sublime, hell even vim and emacs have autocomplete plugins.
Re:Microsoft Open Sources C# Compiler by jkrems on Thursday April 03, 2014 @06:32PM (#7527481)
Microsoft does great work in researching static code analysis, I only remember their auto-complete ten years ago for C++ code and it was miles ahead of anything else. It pops up in just the right moment and it just feels like a genuine "code assistant" instead of just an auto-complete. Unfortunately I don't really trust MS with developing great OSX software (see MS Office for Mac) so I'm not sure I'd want Visual Studio. But if they could pull of a proper port, it would be awesome.
Re:Microsoft Open Sources C# Compiler by NolF on Thursday April 03, 2014 @07:32PM (#7527895)
Excel for Mac doesn't have the "Evaluate Formula" function and the Name Manager is crippled... (to name a few issues) Makes it really hard to do complex and robust development.
Re:Microsoft Open Sources C# Compiler by 72deluxe on Friday April 04, 2014 @06:10AM (#7530331)
The auto-complete is truly wonderful. XCode's isn't too bad (but does anyone know how to get it to pop up the parameters in a function, same as VS Ctrl-Shift-Space????) but the real stinker I had to use was Borlands Codegear 2007. That whole think was rubbish and engaged in colossal disk-churning for auto-complete. The linker crashed and the IDE was buggy as anything. A shame.

But VS auto-complete was a breath of fresh air afterwards.

Re:Microsoft Open Sources C# Compiler by yonilevy on Friday April 04, 2014 @12:50PM (#7532658)
If you haven't already - try AppCode out, it's superior to XCode in so many ways, and the functionality you've asked for is there (Ctrl+Shift+P).
Re:Microsoft Open Sources C# Compiler by jurre on Friday April 04, 2014 @01:27PM (#7532927)
I really want to like AppCode but I just can't deal with the non-native java UI
Re:Microsoft Open Sources C# Compiler by mihaela on Friday April 04, 2014 @03:08PM (#7533607)
I totally agree. I never pay for Java apps.
Re:Microsoft Open Sources C# Compiler by scg on Thursday April 03, 2014 @07:24PM (#7527830)
MS Office for Mac is pretty well done IMHO
Re:Microsoft Open Sources C# Compiler by gilday on Thursday April 03, 2014 @09:23PM (#7528494)
While I really like using MS Office 2013, I just can't use MS Office for Mac. It doesn't seem to integrate with the OS very well. I hope that the next version is better - hopefully retina screen support
Re:Microsoft Open Sources C# Compiler by arturhoo on Thursday April 03, 2014 @11:06PM (#7528944)
MS Office for MAC received retina support in one of the last updates. Try updating your suite.
Re:Microsoft Open Sources C# Compiler by mirkules on Thursday April 03, 2014 @11:51PM (#7529149)
I agree, it's painfully slow for anything but simple tasks. My former company (in)famously does everything in Excel (including Gant and flow charts), and being the only guy with OSX the load times were terrible, the UI sluggish and it crashed often. I was really quite surprised how snappy the UI was when looking at a coworker's windows box.
Re:Microsoft Open Sources C# Compiler by tormeh on Thursday April 03, 2014 @06:40PM (#7527549)
It's fuzzy and instant. If you type "flow" it will treat it as if you searched for "stream". You don't need to know what things are named. You just search for what you think it may be and 9 times out of 10 intellisense will find what you're looking for. It's like having Google doing autocomplete for you.
Re:Microsoft Open Sources C# Compiler by rybosome on Thursday April 03, 2014 @06:37PM (#7527523)
I can't speak for IntelliJ (can never get the damn thing configured correctly), but Eclipse's autocomplete leaves a lot to be desired. This may be configurable, but my experience has been that it's finicky about when it will trigger.

I appreciate Eclipse's openness (and I tend to work with open source languages), but I must admit that purely examining the quality of the tool, Visual Studio is leagues ahead.

Re:Microsoft Open Sources C# Compiler by cmarschner on Thursday April 03, 2014 @06:59PM (#7527658)
And Erich Gamma moved to MS three years ago...
Re:Microsoft Open Sources C# Compiler by 3825 on Thursday April 03, 2014 @08:25PM (#7528232)
Yup, part of the visual studio team. For others, watch him describe Visual Studio Online to Scott Hanselman on Channel 9.

http://channel9.msdn.com/shows/azure-friday/erich-gamma-intr...

MP4 hotlink: http://media.ch9.ms/ch9/793e/d1b6ebda-d31b-413e-983e-1c698a8...

Re:Microsoft Open Sources C# Compiler by untaken on Thursday April 03, 2014 @06:01PM (#7527245)
C# support in IntelliJ would be a dream come true!

(yes, I know about ReSharper - but that's just lipstick on a pig)

Re:Microsoft Open Sources C# Compiler by coldtea on Thursday April 03, 2014 @08:36PM (#7528295)
Pig? VS is considered one of the best IDEs out there. On par, if not better than IntelliJ.
Re:Microsoft Open Sources C# Compiler by vetinari on Friday April 04, 2014 @10:06AM (#7531468)
If it was better, it would not need ReSharper.
Re:Microsoft Open Sources C# Compiler by yesiamyourdad on Friday April 04, 2014 @07:54PM (#7535228)
I use both on a daily basis, and VS + Resharper beats the crap out of IntelliJ, IMO. My opinion might be different if I had to pay for my licenses, but independent of cost, VS wins.