Re:Why did Borland fail?
by kriro on Sunday June 14, 2015 @08:19AM
(#9714621)
From hat I've seen I'll disagree. The people that use vim efficiently [emacs users just substitute emacs] don't just use vim. They are also very efficient using the surrounding (Unixoid) environment. Specifically file searching...I'm not sure IDEs have an edge there.
These days there's also things like eclim. I don't know it seems like vim style editing is still the best way to get around the codebase and actually work with the text but IDEs have great integration to work with the code. So I think the optimal solution is a "best of both worlds" approach which means a vim-plugin for the IDE or an IDEfeatures-plugin for vim. I see the former setup a lot.
---
and my wild guess is that emacs actually has great code integration for Lisps. I don't know what the state of the art Lisp IDE is but I'd be shocked if it was better than emacs.
These days there's also things like eclim. I don't know it seems like vim style editing is still the best way to get around the codebase and actually work with the text but IDEs have great integration to work with the code. So I think the optimal solution is a "best of both worlds" approach which means a vim-plugin for the IDE or an IDEfeatures-plugin for vim. I see the former setup a lot.
--- and my wild guess is that emacs actually has great code integration for Lisps. I don't know what the state of the art Lisp IDE is but I'd be shocked if it was better than emacs.