[HN Gopher] JetBrains Fleet drops support for Kotlin Multiplatform
___________________________________________________________________
JetBrains Fleet drops support for Kotlin Multiplatform
Author : konradkissener
Score : 140 points
Date : 2025-02-11 17:17 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (blog.jetbrains.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (blog.jetbrains.com)
| konradkissener wrote:
| I'm happy to see JetBrains focussing on IntelliJ / Android Studio
| instead. I was really scratching my head when they announced a
| standalone KMP IDE based on Fleet just 4 months ago. [1]
|
| [1] https://blog.jetbrains.com/kotlin/2024/10/kotlin-
| multiplatfo...
| georgemcbay wrote:
| Yeah I've been using KMP a lot for a hobby project app the last
| couple of months, already shipped on Android and iOS and will
| have a Windows Desktop version out soon as well.
|
| As someone who has been incredibly frustrated attempting to use
| multiplatform frameworks in the past and is used to them
| causing more problems than they solve, I've been very
| pleasantly surprised by KMP and Compose Multiplatform.
|
| ... but I never once used Fleet, I just do all the coding in
| Android Studio.
| techwizrd wrote:
| This is definitely surprising given they announced a KMP
| standalone IDE only a few months ago. For now, Flutter still
| seems to make more sense than KMP while the KMP world is still
| maturing.
| robertlagrant wrote:
| I always thought a really good use of KMP would be in writing
| shared non-visual code, e.g. a library that interacts with your
| API(s) and any non-visual like that. Then paint a dumbish,
| platform-specific frontend over the top and link together.
| seanalltogether wrote:
| As someone who has to manage native ios and android apps I
| thought this would be the perfect solution as well. I wanted
| to write all my data models, api calls, sql cache and
| business logic as a separate library written with kmp, but
| what i didn't like was that the ios framework that was
| generated was a black box with just objc headers. If it
| generated full swift code that i could inspect for
| correctness and tweak if needed, I would have jumped on using
| it right away.
| robertlagrant wrote:
| That's interesting - I can sort of see it both ways. Would
| applying unit tests to the exposed functions not have
| sufficed?
| vips7L wrote:
| Dart is an amazing and underrated language too. It compiles to
| native assembly, has pattern matching, async/await, and null
| safety. The only thing it's missing in my opinion is some form
| of checked errors, currently they only have unchecked
| exceptions.
| geodel wrote:
| > The only thing it's missing
|
| I think biggest thing it is missing is any kind of Google
| commitment on its long term usage.
| tadfisher wrote:
| The modern language landscape is backing away from checked
| exceptions. Funnily enough Kotlin eschewed them as well,
| converting checked to unchecked exceptions on the JVM.
| vips7L wrote:
| The modern language landscape has not backed away from
| checked errors. Rust is praised for its checked errors,
| countless posts on this forum praise Result<T> in multiple
| languages. Swift has checked errors and Kotlin is
| implementing them via union types in the near future.
|
| Checked errors, via results or exceptions have never been
| the problem. It has always been Java the language that
| hasn't provided the syntax sugar for handling checked
| errors effectively.
|
| There is no difference between: A doIt()
| throws B fun doIt(): Result<A, B>
|
| It all comes down to what the language lets you do once you
| encounter that error.
| billllll wrote:
| Is Rust praised for its checked errors? I've personally
| found it extremely verbose since there essentially is no
| possibility for unchecked errors.
|
| Also, external crates like "anyhow" are required if you
| don't want to account for literally every single possible
| error case. Really seems like a pedantic's dream but a
| burden to everyone else.
|
| Effective Java recommends checked exceptions only in the
| case where the caller may recover, but in practice you're
| usually just propagating the error to the caller in some
| form, so almost everything just becomes unchecked runtime
| exceptions.
| vips7L wrote:
| I'm only saying what I've seen here. I typically see
| praise for Rust's checked errors. Especially since they
| provide ? to panic and uncheck them. Personally I
| disagree with Bloch, if you are the thrower you can't
| possibly know if the caller can or cannot recover from
| your error so in my opinion its best to check it. If you
| are not the thrower and you can't recover from it I
| prefer to uncheck them, because if I can't recover my
| caller most likely can't either.
|
| The issue really just arises with Java not giving you the
| capability to uncheck that error easily if you can't
| recover from it. For example, you need a ton of lines to
| uncheck: A doIt() throws B {
| throw new B(); } void usingIt() {
| A a; try { a = doIt();
| } catch (B b) { throw new
| RuntimeException(b); }
| a.woohoo(); }
|
| My ideal situation would be for some sort of throws
| unchecked operator (or whatever syntax we want to
| bikeshed over) that turns them into unchecked exceptions.
| void usingIt() throws unchecked B { var a =
| doIt(); a.woohoo(); }
| ninetyninenine wrote:
| Have you heard of the language elm? The language elm is
| so safe that it is literally impossible to crash the
| program short of a memory error.
|
| That's essentially the direction of modern programming
| languages. It's part of that feeling you get when
| programming haskell. Once you get it running, it just
| works. It's very different from the old paradigm where
| once you get it working, it can crash and you have to
| debug and do more to get it working better.
| ninetyninenine wrote:
| Looks like a huge difference to me. The first function
| throws an error. The second function may not even return
| an error.
| vips7L wrote:
| The first function may not return an error either.
| tadfisher wrote:
| There is a huge difference: the first is an _exception_,
| which:
|
| - Unwinds the stack to a try/catch or exception handler,
| making exceptions practically difficult to deal with in
| concurrent programming.
|
| - If unchecked, can be ignored, silently propagating
| during stack unwinding.
|
| - If checked, infects the call stack with 'throws'
| annotations.
|
| The second is a normal return value, with no try/catch
| needed, handling the error case is mandatory in order to
| handle the success case, and there is not a separate
| execution regime occurring whenever an error case is
| encountered.
| NeutralForest wrote:
| I just don't trust Google with a programming language. I feel
| like Golang has escaped the orbit of Google and could survive
| without it (I might be wrong). But for Dart I'm pretty sure
| it would die fast and I don't want to invest time into it as
| a result.
| kiawe_fire wrote:
| Oddly, I'm conflicted on Flutter so far, but I have _loved_
| working in Dart.
|
| So much so that I ended up writing a queueing app for
| scheduling batches of sequential tasks on the server in Dart
| just to see how it could work as a NodeJS replacement, and
| thought the whole dev experience was great.
| rizzaxc wrote:
| i find its biggest problem is its json ecosystem; very clunky
| and boilerplate-y
| wiseowise wrote:
| Good riddance. It is almost like the decision to build a
| "standalone KMP IDE" came from some Reddit thread with 5 upvotes.
| Android ecosystem is built around Android Studio, in what world
| millions of devs would suddenly switch from free (subsidized)
| Android Studio to a paid Fleet developed by a third party (third
| first third party?) is beyond me.
| malkia wrote:
| I've been long user of JetBrains' products - and love them. I
| even use ReSharper in Visual Studio (which I still consider
| better IDE, but for Linux / Mac - JetBrains is my choice, and
| heck, sometimes even Rider/CLion/RustRover/GoLand on Windows too
| - especcially GoLand).
|
| But... but... I've always wanted (and willing to pay) a single
| IDE with any plugin that works in it - not just so many different
| versions...
|
| I'm a multiple programming language user - mostly C++, but also
| Python, Go, Rust, C#, etc.
| arwineap wrote:
| In jetbrains paradigm you should install IDEA and install
| python plugin, go plugin, etc. You only have to do it once
|
| That should get you within 90%+ use cases
| malkia wrote:
| I think there was no C++ (ahem native) debugger in IDEA...
| but I'll check again, could be wrong really...
| teh64 wrote:
| Sadly not, as Clion is not available as a plugin like
| almost all other IDEs: https://www.jetbrains.com/products/c
| ompare/?product=idea&pro...
| malkia wrote:
| Thanks!!! I also saw your other post about C# - maybe one
| day JetBrains would change their mind!
|
| I'm trying latest IDEA (2025.1 EAP) and for the first
| time a bazel project that I have got parsed successfully
| (had to enable some old legacy flag though), so there is
| hope!
| LeFrosch wrote:
| Did you use the google plugin or the new BSP based one by
| JetBrains?
| malkia wrote:
| Over the years I've tried both the google plugin, and now
| the BSP one.
|
| Mixed results. Almost always works on Linux/OSX, but my
| dominant platform is Windows.
|
| Yesterday tried it again (BSP one) with IDEA 21.5 EAP
| with nightly on the plugins, and things got synced, but
| was not able to find any targets (they are C++ targets),
| funny it found and listed a "filegroup"
|
| But I have my hopes up, the BSP looks like it's doing the
| right thing discovering much faster the targets, and
| probably needs more work just to finish all edge cases
| (like mine - Windows).
| pjmlp wrote:
| Meanwhile Eclipse and Netbeans have been supporting mixed
| language development, and JNI debugging, for the last two
| decades.
| Macha wrote:
| IntelliJ has supported this for over a decade also, and
| having used Eclipse for PHP a decade ago, I think it's
| very generous to say that that was actually supporting
| non-Java languages as an IDE, rather than just a very
| slow and heavyweight text editor. I'd say Eclipse's
| weakness for Python, PHP, etc. at that time led to how
| long IDE-skepticism has been a thing.
| pjmlp wrote:
| No it wasn't, you have to have IntelliJ and Clion to
| debug JNI, and there are no plans on the roadmap to ever
| do otherwise.
|
| In fact, the JNI tooling support on Android Studio is a
| custom implementation done by Android team themselves.
| invalidname wrote:
| That doesn't work and is a major problem for me. I have a
| Java project with C++ native code. Using a devcontainer so
| the C++ dependencies are installed seems like the right thing
| to do... Unfortunately, I need to use Idea for the
| devcontainer and can't use both it and clion. Separating it
| to two projects defeats the purpose as the Java code depends
| on the C++ code which will be in a different container.
|
| VSCode supports multiple languages in one container just
| fine. My hacky solution is to use a hybrid container with
| IntelliJ for the Java code and then connect VSCode to it for
| doing C++. That means I will be forfeiting my CLion license.
| I contacted their support (which is reasonably responsive),
| they say they're working on a solution but I don't know when
| it will be practical for me.
| NomDePlum wrote:
| It is possible to install the Python and Go plugins into
| IntelliJ. That's the setup used wildly in my current place of
| work.
|
| It wouldn't surprise me if that was the case with Rust, C++,
| and possibly even C# too.
|
| I'm sure there is some loss of UX and related features in this
| setup but there are always trade-offs.
| teh64 wrote:
| No both C++ and C# need to be bought as separate IDEs:
|
| Only Clion includes C++: https://www.jetbrains.com/products/c
| ompare/?product=idea&pro...
|
| Only Rider includes C#: https://www.jetbrains.com/products/co
| mpare/?product=idea&pro...
| NomDePlum wrote:
| Thanks. I don't use either but good to correct my guess.
| jayd16 wrote:
| Rider handles C++ but it looks like that's only for MSBuild
| projects.
| deergomoo wrote:
| I would happily pay through the nose for their language and
| refactoring features as some sort of LSP or plugin for other
| editors.
|
| I use their products because that aspect is best-in-class for
| many languages, but the actual applications themselves leave a
| lot of be desired. Core text editing is pretty good, but so
| many Byzantine nested menus and odd Java fully-modal locks-out-
| the-background dialogs.
| ok123456 wrote:
| > Byzantine nested menus
|
| crtl-shift-a
| vunderba wrote:
| Was just going to post that yeah, _ALL_ the JetBrains IDEs
| have a "Command Palette" with fuzzy search for all
| actions. I can't remember the last time I even went through
| the menu bar.
| wiseowise wrote:
| Have you tried Zen mode?
| bastardoperator wrote:
| They can't build the mothership, that means they only have one
| product. The problem I have is that they build these editors to
| their benefit, not mine. I had the same problem despite liking
| the tools initially. Between nvchad and vscode, I have all my
| bases covered for any situation/language.
| hadrien01 wrote:
| I still don't understand where Jetbrains is going with Fleet. Is
| it a platform to prototype ideas for their IDEs? Is their long-
| term goal to replace their IDEs with Fleet? Is it just a
| standalone product?
|
| So far, it seems like they're very slowly recreating their IDEs
| from scratch in Fleet while continuing development on the
| IntelliJ Platform and related IDEs, doing twice as much work for
| nothing.
| gf000 wrote:
| I believe they are heavily reusing the non-UI part of Intellij
| and the like, so it's not really 2x the development.
| vips7L wrote:
| Yeah I think they're just trying to get out of Swing by
| developing a new ui, Swing isn't that fun to develop.
| tadfisher wrote:
| Unfortunately they started building Fleet before Compose
| Multiplatform was ready, so now they support three UI
| technologies. Granted, Fleet uses the same rendering base
| as Compose (Skiko), but that's got to be a dead end
| ultimately.
| ashu1461 wrote:
| Usually Intellij products are slow and fleet does not seem to
| be slow, so it is feels likely a lot of code was rewritten to
| make it fast.
| sfn42 wrote:
| I don't think they're slow at all. Takes a while to index
| when opening a new project, then everything is snappy.
|
| My main reason for using JB is I loathe the shitty build
| your own ide experience of VSC. Everything is more
| difficult, whereas in JB everything just works.
| solardev wrote:
| I think Fleet's their hopeful answer to VSCode. IntelliJ is
| powerful, but so, so messy, with a convoluted UI from the
| 90s/2000s. Even the simplified one is much klunklier than
| VSCode, especially for everyday/every-hour tasks like NPM
| scripts, debugging, etc. Every essential function is hidden in
| tiny competing side panels triggered by some obscure icon in a
| different part of the screen.
|
| I love and use Jetbrains IDEs every day, but after a decade I
| still only find their UIs merely tolerable. Many of my
| colleagues try them out for an hour or two and then jump ship
| back to VSCode just because the initial "wtf is going on"
| factor is so high =/
|
| I'm guessing Fleet was their answer, an opportunity to develop
| a greenfield UI for a new generation of devs raised with UX (vs
| the old guard of IntelliJ users from past decades). It made
| sense, until AI suddenly took over everything and nobody cared
| what your IDE UI is like anymore.
| nprateem wrote:
| Please don't post flamebait. Jetbrains seem intent on dumbing
| down their UI as much as possible so we have to hunt through
| useless hamburger menus instead of just looking in pinned
| panels, etc.
| MattPalmer1086 wrote:
| I see no flamebait. Your own post is much more flamebaity.
| homebrewer wrote:
| You forgot to add "IMHO". IDEA has fantastic UI, it's fully
| configurable and 100% usable through pre-assigned hotkeys.
| For example, fuzzy search is available _everywhere_ , in
| every tool window, in the database window, in search results,
| etc. The same key combination (ctrl+alt+arrow up/down on my
| instance) can be used to jump between search results, symbol
| usages, TODOs, linter results, and so on. They thought
| through and implemented countless convenient features, most
| of which I will not be able to remember, but do use every day
| purely through muscle memory.
|
| They're also now intent on destroying them in favor of the
| "new" primitive UI by trying to cater to new users (who are
| seemingly fine with never becoming power users). The good UI
| is still available through a plugin, but it's obvious it will
| be dropped in the next few years. I'm pretty sure they will
| lose the old guard like me right after that.
| tommica wrote:
| Yep, I'm glad for their "Classic UI" plugin - I really
| dislike working with the new one, it's too VSCody for my
| liking.
| solardev wrote:
| I mean, I did start the post with an "I think"... it's
| pretty clearly an opinion, no?
|
| I also don't think that's some obscure hypothesis on my
| part. It was just the zeitgeist at the time Fleet first
| came out (https://developers.slashdot.org/story/21/12/04/16
| 55249/jetbr...)... seemed obvious that it was to counter
| VSCode. Fleet's own homepage says "We envisioned Fleet as a
| coding tool with a clear minimalist design that doesn't
| overwhelm and helps keep you focused."
|
| I'm not trying to convince anyone that one look & feel is
| better than another, just point out that there IS a
| generational divide (my guess) or at least a divide (of
| SOME sort) between those who prefer dense UIs and those who
| prefer simpler ones. My younger coworkers especially seem
| to struggle with the full-blown IntelliJ - it's just a
| trend I noticed, not some deep scholarly analysis. It's
| part of a generational fashion trend towards more
| whitespace and less information density.
|
| Jetbrains already risked quite a flame war when they
| launched the "simplified UI" for IntelliJ, to a very mixed
| love-it-or-hate-it reception. They realized they couldn't
| change the existing UI too much without alienating some %
| of their existing users. So Fleet was a way to instead make
| an alternative, sharing some of the same backend but with a
| different enough UI for those who want it.
|
| I doubt it's ever going to replace the traditional IntelliJ
| UI, especially now that they're refocusing efforts on AI
| stuff instead of minimalist UIs.
| johnisgood wrote:
| > They're also now intent on destroying them in favor of
| the "new" primitive UI by trying to cater to new users (who
| are seemingly fine with never becoming power users).
|
| I am a power user of my tools. It is sad when a tool gets
| simplified and have configurations deleted, it is like
| getting rid of "Advanced" option, essentially.
| graypegg wrote:
| Genuine question, what are you missing from the old UI? I
| am still maybe not a "fan" of the new UI, but I've since
| gotten pretty proficient with it and I genuinely can't
| think of anything that's impeding me. I think the general
| information density dropped somewhat, but a lot of the old
| UI was noise. I don't need a big file path taking up 60% of
| the top toolbar. Nor a default Jetbrains space logo just
| sitting there. Why do I need a disabled stop button when no
| task/debug job is running? The old VCS tools were quick to
| access but it was also just 3 arrows next to the word
| "GIT:". That's a bit clunky and hard to click isn't it? And
| it's not like I need to optimize milliseconds on "updating
| this branch". It happens a lot but opening a menu is the
| same amount of effort while not requiring close hit
| targets. No matter your muscle memory, you'll nudge 16px
| over every once in a while. (<shiftshift> pull <return>
| also being my preferred way to pull/any VCS action anyway,
| so the point is moot)
|
| Maybe my one main complaint is the side panes. I still
| loathe the hieroglyphic buttons. I would love a return to
| the sensible vertical text labels... but even then I
| realize I never change the order of those panes, so it's
| not like I'm ever unsure of which pane is which at this
| point.
|
| It feels... perfectly cromulent. I don't really care at
| this point, if it helps new folks use IDEA IDEs, cool.
| Doesn't affect my life at all now. And that's coming from
| someone that does actually use the useful features of an
| IDE, and has been for a long time.
| phreack wrote:
| Honestly the hieroglyphic buttons are a deal breaker for
| me. It's just a cognitive load I can't overcome without
| frustration. The vertical labels were just perfect and
| Jetbrains actively ignores feedback on that. On a second
| place, not having bottom toolbars anymore is such a
| downgrade! I would use it to have a convenient console at
| hand constantly. I did use the Git buttons constantly,
| and now it's either hard or impossible to customize some
| buttons, plus they'll be hieroglyphical. And at the end,
| I just don't like how there's less information like where
| my file is located (as in, "which index.js was I looking
| at?"), visual separators marking button borders and tab
| borders are now gone, and so on.
|
| Now, there's the classic plugin but it's got an
| expiration date. I also could get used to all of this,
| and I did, I migrated to VSCode. It has a surprising (yet
| hilariously complex) amount of theming options and I got
| the contrast to previous JB defaults. Because Jetbrains'
| communication has been just awful throughout this change
| these past couple of years, I just don't trust them
| anymore to not destroy my workflow on a whim, it's a
| portent of enshittification.
| graypegg wrote:
| The bottom toolbar... is something I didn't consider
| actually. Also agree with you on that. That removed a
| whole layout option. (Split bottom left/right, OR open a
| wide bottom pane. Now all panes need to be splits.)
| DecentShoes wrote:
| I despise the trend of removing text labels for icons.
| It's bad design, everyone knows it's bad design, Windows
| 11 is full of this mistake, but one company did it and I
| guess now everyone has to do it.
| speleding wrote:
| I too missed the old VCS tools in the new UI. But it was
| 10 minutes work to get them back in the toolbar, along
| with a few other things I missed (and that setting syncs
| to my JetBrains account, so new installs get that same
| modification).
|
| I get trying to be minimalist but the VCS icons are
| really useful because they also convey if something has
| not been pushed / pulled yet.
| vr46 wrote:
| I literally did not renew last month after twelve years of
| paying, and longer overall, and the UI was the last straw.
| I installed the "classic" UI plugin, but it's like you say,
| I know they're going to drop it. I figured that if I have
| to use a UI like their new one then I can use VSCode as
| well, there's no real reason to stay. The real cutting edge
| stuff is happening over at VSCode anyway. Plus Jetbrains
| never made a decent VCS interface and I can always use an
| older version with a permanent fallback licence.
| coldtea wrote:
| > _You forgot to add "IMHO"_
|
| But also objectively.
| joseda-hg wrote:
| I don't know, being uber configurable isn't necessarily
| what you want when you're not familiar with a tool and you
| don't know yet what you need to configure or faff with
|
| I've only recently started using JetBrains, so I'm only
| familiar with the new UI but I distinctly feel like I don't
| know what I'm missing on extra functions because I'm just
| not aware of it existing
| nsonha wrote:
| VSCode can do all of that, and for most languages,
| VSCode's/OSS LSPs are often more performant/feature rich
| than whatever running inside IDea that takes tens of
| minutes to index a project in my computer.
|
| Who should I take seriously now? The "power users" who
| claim that vim with lsp and terminal is the way, or the
| "power users" who claim that bloated UIs is the way?
|
| As far as I am concerned, "power users" only really need
| the functionality to be there and accessible with a command
| palette, do away with "power users" panels and buttons
| please.
| indexedcosmoks wrote:
| >VSCode's/OSS LSPs are often more performant/feature rich
| than whatever running inside IDea that takes tens of
| minutes to index a project in my computer.
|
| Typically if this happens I notice IDEA is indexing the
| entire dependency tree for something like node or python.
| It'll have an understanding of everything but is much
| slower to index and typically not needed. If you exclude
| node_modules you'll have very fast time once again
| DecentShoes wrote:
| You also didn't add "IMHO".
| brandonmenc wrote:
| > with a convoluted UI from the 90s/2000s
|
| Some of us love this UI.
| sureIy wrote:
| But those of you will be retiring soon, hence "Fleet for
| the new generation"
| sunaookami wrote:
| Not OP, but I'm not even 30 and heavily dislike the new
| UI.
| MortyWaves wrote:
| What would HN be without the agism and nasty remarks that
| somehow are always initiated by colour and theme
| preferences.
|
| Grow up.
| doctorpangloss wrote:
| > Many of my colleagues try them out for an hour or two and
| then jump ship back to VSCode just because the initial "wtf
| is going on" factor is so high
|
| People who get hung up on the aesthetics of their IDEs are
| going to have other problems with programming generally.
| grogenaut wrote:
| I'm the opposite, vs code feels so clunky to me and full of
| crappy bolted on low and mid quality plugins. Yes it's lower
| barrier to entry on making things and for editing configs but
| the configs are opaque, hard to find. Odd for microsoft that
| it's more of a linux mindset than windows. It feels so janky
| setting up run configurations or test runs.
| MortyWaves wrote:
| Not to mention it hardly seems to support simply running
| things from package.json script section when doing JS
| stuff. Every time I try it seems to never quite work, or is
| very clunky and obtuse, sometimes requiring the creation of
| new files (???) to do it.
|
| Compare that with the other main IDE I use, Visual Studio.
| It works great.
| coldtea wrote:
| > _full of crappy bolted on low and mid quality plugins_
|
| That's on you. What it comes with is great. And there's a
| huge selection of good third party plugins if one takes
| attention to what they install.
| phreack wrote:
| I think how awful making run configurations is, is the one
| worst aspect of VSCode. tasks.json? launch.json? I just
| want the "run" button to run a custom build command and I
| could just not figure it out.
| cosmic_cheese wrote:
| I feel similarly about IntelliJ IDEs as someone primarily
| coming from Xcode.
|
| Xcode has its own share of weaknesses, don't get me wrong.
| It's just that I'm irritated more frequently by quirks of
| IntelliJ IDEs like how the sidebar palettes work in a way
| that they're constantly at battle with each other and how
| super simple considerations like per-editor-pane
| back/forward/history are missing. They sometimes feel like
| they trip over the basics in pursuit of fancy gizmos.
| b_e_n_t_o_n wrote:
| My only problem with jetbrains UI is that it's slow. Night
| and day difference using even vscode, let alone vim, sublime,
| helix, zed, etc. I tolerate it because the functionality it
| brings, but I find myself actually _writing_ code in
| something faster. And I don 't see fleet improving on this in
| a meaningful way - it's basically a competitor to vscode,
| which I don't use for the same reasons I won't use fleet.
|
| There is a whole nother discussion about "progressive
| discovery" of functionality which I think is actually wrong
| although that would be a fringe view among "UX" specialists.
| nmfisher wrote:
| Exactly this. Every time I revisit a Jetbrains product, I
| uninstall it within 5 minutes. It doesn't matter how great
| the features are, it's just sluggish.
|
| People can rag on Electron apps all they like, but VSCode
| on modern hardware is very snappy. Jetbrains is a
| noticeable downgrade.
| winrid wrote:
| Weird. None of my PCs have cpus made after 2018. After
| the initial indexing, things are fast. I guess that's
| what you're running into on startup.
| indexedcosmoks wrote:
| There are still things like opening a menu somewhere that
| has a random worst case latency of ~2 seconds for me. It
| feels random and is frustrating, but not quite enough
| where I'd consider learning to use something else
| winrid wrote:
| interesting, what menu? Just curious if I have gotten
| used to it. My desktop is a 2700x and my laptop is an 8th
| gen i7, hardly competitive nowadays. I usually have 3-6
| IDE windows open. I think sometimes resolving TS types in
| Webstorm can take a few seconds after some changes.
|
| It's not Sublime Text fast, for sure.
| pjmlp wrote:
| Just use Eclipse or Netbeans instead, I never liked
| InteliJ for Java development due to its continuous
| indexing, errors have to be explicilty asked for, and the
| ten finger combos for shortcuts.
|
| VSCode is anyway running either Netbeans or Eclipse
| headless for its Java support, better use the real deal.
| anonzzzies wrote:
| Yep, same here. I just uninstall because it's unusable
| compared to vscode/vim/emacs/zed for the same jobs. And I
| have a new-ish macbook pro. I always hear people say they
| have a different experience, but, like with so many things
| in life, that always seems not true when I sit next to
| them; then it is just them being used to sluggish misery as
| the normal.
| rhubarbtree wrote:
| No complaints on my MacBook Air M2. What machine are you
| on?
|
| It's definitely not as fast to load etc as say sublime, but
| it's an IDE not an editor.
| mavamaarten wrote:
| Well.. I'm running it on an M3 and it can be truly slow.
| Not always! But opening up a package inside a multi-
| module Kotlin project can literally take 10 seconds.
| Which isn't much seeing how great of an IDE it is and how
| much time it saves because it is so powerful. But it's
| heavy alright. Every time I see new features I don't
| really use, I wish they would invest in trimming fat
| instead.
| mike_hearn wrote:
| There's something really not right there. Right click the
| bottom right status bar area, enable memory monitor and
| ensure you aren't running out of RAM or something. I use
| IntelliJ on an old Intel MacBook with a large Kotlin
| project and its performance is good. I never have to wait
| ten seconds for something like that. It sounds like you
| may have some old flag that's limiting its heap size or
| pushing it into GC thrashing or something. Definitely
| look at the IDE logs and see if you can track it down.
| cardanome wrote:
| I actually use Jetbrains products because of the
| performance.
|
| Sure indexing a new project takes a while and things will
| be sluggish at first but once it done, it works great. And
| you can easily edit huge files, like seriously huge files
| without problems, even the search will work smoothly.
| Basically the Java school of performance, absolute
| resources hog but scales very well.
|
| For me vscode is intolerably slow. Sure it starts up
| quickly but the editing experience is absolutely
| infuriating. I had projects that I could not work with in
| vscode because a few thousand lines of code in a file were
| already too much for it.
| juped wrote:
| Slow? Jetbrains IDEs, slow? Compared to, of all things, the
| LSP-reliant VS Code?
|
| I pay for them primarily to save me from LSP, which they do
| for many languages, though the Elixir plugin is not _by_
| Jetbrains (but it actually predates LSP itself).
| brundolf wrote:
| My main barrier to IDEA is actually performance. Despite
| people's complaints about electron apps, VSCode is viscerally
| snappier in all the little interactions. I tried to switch to
| IDEA for the powerful features, but it always felt like mud
|
| I haven't tried Fleet but that could be part of it
| Aeolun wrote:
| I thought fleet would be that snappy alternative, but then,
| in a fit of insanity, they decided to outsource all the
| actual non-render logic to the IDEA engine, and the whole
| thing was dead on arrival for me.
|
| Now I use Zed, which seems to be what Fleet should have
| been.
| noodletheworld wrote:
| > Many of my colleagues try them out for an hour or two and
| then jump ship back to VSCode just because the initial "wtf
| is going on" factor is so high =/
|
| Really?
|
| I mean, the UIs are basically the same now. I have them open
| side by side on my desktop _right now_ and they 're both:
|
| - black boxes with a panel on the left of icons, then a tree
| of files, then a tabbed pane of open files.
|
| - clicking on the icons on the left opens some obscure
| subwindow depending on you magically knowing what the icon
| means.
|
| The only meaningful difference is that in vscode there's a
| command palette at the top where you can type in random stuff
| and get a list of actions, and in intellij you have to 'know'
| that the shortcut for that is 'press shift 3 times' instead
| of 'shift control p'
|
| ...but I mean, _thats it_ ; they're otherwise pretty much
| identical, practically.
|
| Honestly, anyone who opens intellij and then goes back to
| vscode because its _too different_ is a numpty.
|
| Things work differently, and people don't like different
| things, and if they go back because it was _different_ or the
| _shortcuts_ are different, that 's fair. It is disruptive.
|
| ...but, because the 'wtf is going on' factor is too high?
| Realllllllly? What does that even mean?
|
| Come on. They're not that different. If clicking on 'run' on
| the top right instead of on the left bar is too 'wtf', you
| really haven't made a real effort to try using the other IDE.
|
| (The same goes for old school intellij users who try vscode
| and then run away. Give it a decent shot before you walk away
| because it's too hard if the only hard thing is your keyboard
| shortcut muscle memory... vscode is pretty great)
|
| You only really see the deep differences when you use them
| extensively for things like refactoring and debugging.
| charrondev wrote:
| On the topic of keyboard shortcuts I use both IntelliJ IDEs
| and VSCode every day.
|
| IntelliJ ships a "VSCode" keymap in the product that you
| can switch to with one option in the settings.
| DangitBobby wrote:
| VSCode also has a plugin for IntelliJ keybindings FWIW.
| MortyWaves wrote:
| I've been trying DataGrip for SQL stuff after Azure Data
| Studio (a closed source fork of VS Code) was recently
| deprecated.
|
| It has all the same UI problems I remember of their other
| IDEs like WebStorm. Clunky and weird looking, and that's
| coming from someone that appreciates generally Windows 9x
| style controls and palette, JetBrains just can't get it
| right.
|
| As a side note one of the advertised features of DataGrip is
| its AI/LLM features which I thought was kind of cool after
| dealing with a terribly designed and legacy database; LLMs
| have really helped with refactoring.
|
| So once I got a license for DataGrip and then opened it the
| AI tool was no where to be seen. I had to go read the docs
| page online to find out I have to install the extension
| myself. Weird.
|
| The advertised AI feature is... behind another paywall with a
| seven day trial. Hang on, I just got DataGrip for its
| "included" AI support and you want to charge me for it
| anyway?
|
| I'm glad I got the license for free via their OSS support,
| but would I have bothered if I knew one of the main features
| is actually a separate paid feature? Probably not.
| conradfr wrote:
| I mean adding AI without changing the IDE price would not
| make to much sense, financially.
|
| I would have love it though ;)
| joseda-hg wrote:
| Ostensibly it's not one of the main features, Datagrip as a
| product has been a thing long before AI integration was
| even a thought
| MortyWaves wrote:
| It's absolutely front and center of its marketing page.
| konradkissener wrote:
| I don't understand it either. I don't think it appeals to many
| VS Code users, and to IntelliJ users probably even less so.
|
| KMP support was the only reason I was still curious about
| Fleet. I presume this announcement is the beginning of the end
| for Fleet.
| sureIy wrote:
| It definitely appeals VSC users like VSC appealed to Sublime
| Text.
|
| There was really no reason for ST users to switch to VSC
| other than better tool integration.
|
| Winning people over from VSC means having a free and fast
| editor with great features and lots of useful plugins. Still
| a long way to go.
| vunderba wrote:
| Personally I had always hoped that Fleet was intended to be
| sort of a lightweight editor in the same arena as notepad++ or
| sublime.
| whoisthemachine wrote:
| In my opinion it seems like an experimental competitor to VS
| Code while also giving them a way to dog food new Java-based UI
| frameworks (KMP, Compose).
| NoahKAndrews wrote:
| Except it doesn't use Compose, it uses its own new thing that
| sounds kind of similar, but predates Compose Desktop.
| whoisthemachine wrote:
| Interesting! Would be curious to know what that is like.
| vinayan3 wrote:
| I've been hoping that Fleet would emerge as a true multi
| language IDE. I code in GoLang and Python regularly. I
| currently have the Python plugin in Goland which is not the
| professional plugin. If I want them I have to use a different
| IDE and switching back and forth is a pain.
|
| Also, with a rewrite I've hoped that remote development will be
| less buggy than it currently is with Goland. It's laggy too and
| you see weird screen flashes. Sometimes certain features don't
| even work over remote.
| solardev wrote:
| Can you not use IntelliJ IDEA (the Java one) with the Python
| and Go plugins?
| danw1979 wrote:
| yes you can, but only the paid for Ultimate edition if you
| want the Golang plugin.
| vinayan3 wrote:
| Yes I tried this for awhile but I hit some very odd issue
| with the bazel plugin and the codebase I work on. It went
| away when I switched to Goland.
|
| I haven't tried again to see if newer versions have fixed
| the issue.
| pantulis wrote:
| > I still don't understand where Jetbrains is going with Fleet.
| Is it a platform to prototype ideas for their IDEs? Is their
| long-term goal to replace their IDEs with Fleet? Is it just a
| standalone product?
|
| They don't necessarily need to exactly _know_ what it is,
| perhaps is just Jetbrains hedging their bets.
| root3 wrote:
| "doing twice as much work for nothing" - it's precisely right
| alde wrote:
| I talked to a Jetbrains representative at a conference about
| this. They said Fleet was/is an experiment in the realtime
| collaboration tech, which really bloomed during Covid. They
| said it is no longer seen as a good direction internally, so
| not to expect much.
|
| Maybe things have changed since then, no idea.
| giancarlostoro wrote:
| That's a shame to hear, I really would love something like
| Fleet from them where I dont have to install the umpteenth
| IDE flavor, or use one of their plugins with an IDE built
| around something else entirely.
| codingwagie wrote:
| Personal opinion is that JetBrains products have gone down hill
| the last few years. Tons of memory leaks and performance issues.
| They are also way behind on the AI front, borderline obsolete in
| some areas. This is coming from someone who has used jetbrains
| daily for over a decade
| realityfactchex wrote:
| What would you suggested instead of JetBrains tools for AI-
| assisted development?
|
| (I don't just want to hear what everyone says; I specifically I
| want to hear what JetBrains lovers think about this.)
|
| I was about to go all in on JetBrains becaue I can't stand
| VSCode, and about to transition from ChatGPT only to trying out
| in-IDE integrations... but if there's a better thing to try
| first... all ears.
| surrTurr wrote:
| JetBrains is WAY behind VS-Code and its forks (e.g. Cursor)
| in terms of AI features.
|
| Their own offering, "Jetbrains AI" absolutely SUCKS (just
| read the reviews, you'll see why).
|
| Third-party AI plugins are pretty basic. Most just offer
| inline completions and a chat sidebar. For example, GitHub
| Copilot for Intellij is a shell of itself: No agent
| capabilities, or even model switching (although that seems to
| be coming in a future update).
|
| Generally speaking, Jetbrains seems to have missed the AI
| code editor revolution, and are now trying to play catch-up.
| The problem is that their plugin API seems to offer less
| capabilities than VS-Code when it comes to implementing
| advanced AI features (think of cursor like features). This,
| combined with the fact that Intellij products are closed
| source and can't simply be forked by someone who requires
| additional capabilities, makes it hard for third parties to
| build advanced AI features.
|
| PS: I also tested their new "Agent" plugin called Junie
| (invite only beta). It's really basic (like 30% as good as
| cursors agent mode), but since it's still in invite only beta
| this should be taken with a grain of salt.
| kuschku wrote:
| > This, combined with the fact that Intellij products are
| closed source and can't simply be forked by someone who
| requires additional capabilities
|
| https://github.com/JetBrains/intellij-community is Apache
| 2.0
|
| Only some of the language plugins are proprietary.
| jeroenhd wrote:
| > Most just offer inline completions and a chat sidebar
|
| As someone who doesn't use AI all that much: what else does
| an IDE need besides an inline prompt and a ChatGPT window
| to the side? I've played around with the continue.dev
| plugin and I can't think of anything else I'd want out of
| AI assistants with the quality they're at at the moment.
|
| > GitHub Copilot for Intellij is a shell of itself
|
| That's on Github, to be honest. And to be expected. It
| doesn't make much sense for Microsoft to fund a plugin for
| a competitor's IDE when they already have their own IDEs to
| sell.
|
| > Intellij products are closed source
|
| They follow the same protocol Microsoft uses: the core is
| open, but some language plugin features are proprietary.
| For Microsoft, the proprietary part is just the C# debugger
| at this point, whereas IntellJ has a whole bunch of paid-
| for plugins that are closed-source. Still, you can fork the
| community edition of IntelliJ should you wish.
| nprateem wrote:
| Aider. Just add the files you need in the terminal, disable
| git autocommit and you're done. Tell it to do something then
| check the diff.
| vunderba wrote:
| I would highly suggest using the jetbrains plug-in
| "continue". It's BYOK or you can connect it to Ollama.
| Supports refactoring, inline, RAG, chat, etc.
|
| https://github.com/continuedev/continue
| KronisLV wrote:
| I rather like the idea behind Continue.dev, especially when
| I have Ollama with some larger models running on a server
| somewhere.
|
| However, I have to say that it's a bit buggy, some things
| like running together with the SonarQube plugin breaks it,
| other times UI elements for keyboard shortcuts just hang
| around on the screen when they shouldn't be
| visible/present. There's a good deal of stuff in their
| issue tracker: https://github.com/continuedev/continue/issu
| es?q=is%3Aissue%...
|
| That said, I had a pretty good experience with the GitHub
| Copilot plugin, as long as you're willing to pay for it.
| timrichard wrote:
| I've been using Jetbrains IDEs for quite some time. I
| currently use IntelliJ and Cursor together. Cursor is
| everything I hoped Jetbains AI would be. The TypeScript
| support in VSCode and derivatives (like Cursor) is great,
| unlike Jetbrains. As I already have a license, I switch to
| IntelliJ for the fantastic Git and DB plugins, as well as the
| great refactoring and find/replace features. Local History
| and diffing in Jetbrains is also far superior, so sometimes I
| use history labels as snapshots in between significant
| changes from Cursor.
|
| If you're transitioning from ChatGPT pastes to an IDE
| integration, I would recommend a trial of Cursor. They have
| acquired SuperMaven, and the autocomplete feature is mostly
| appropriate and useful. I think the chat-diff-review-apply
| workflow really tightens and accelerates the feedback loop,
| as well as the ability to submit an error from the terminal
| to the chat session with a single click. People say good
| things about the Compose and Agent features, but I haven't so
| far been drawn to them to explore.
| insane_dreamer wrote:
| I use the PyCharm CoPilot plugin. Works great. Can't comment
| on how good the CoPilot model is vs say Claude or ChatGPT,
| but it seems decent for what I use it for (autocomplete,
| small snippets, stuff that I'd look up in the docs or SO,
| etc.)
| endofreach wrote:
| Interesting. I have had the opposite experience. And i am happy
| that they're behind on the AI front.
|
| Way too many tools force their shitty AI (API wrapper) upon me
| already. And i have yet to see any benefit.
| laerus wrote:
| Agreed, RustRover is by far the best IDE for Rust atm. I also
| use the AI Assistant which is so toned down that it's
| actually useful and not full of spam.
| lallysingh wrote:
| RustRover and PyCharm keep my jetbrains subscription going.
| The AI assistant on pandas APIs is a godsend.
| ta988 wrote:
| I have the exact opposite experience same thing almost a
| decade. They were great then there was a phase of really bad
| performance around 5-6y ago and in the last 3 years it has been
| much better improving with each version. It is especially much
| more reactive when indexing large projects or just navigating
| them.
| vunderba wrote:
| Hard disagree. Pycharm, Datagrip, and Rider are absolutely top
| notch applications.
|
| And I would vastly prefer that they focus on robust IDE
| features than yet another bunch of "Now with AI" crap duct
| taped to their products.
| ashu1461 wrote:
| Most of the young crowd is very biased towards vs code
| irrespective of the top notch features which intellij is
| providing, so to win the game against vs code fleet becomes
| critical.
| dboreham wrote:
| Very old here (used VC++ v1.0). VSCode user, exclusively
| for the last 4 years.
| the__alchemist wrote:
| Agree on the performance, unfortunately. Even C+P operations in
| RustRover are "too complex".
| vr46 wrote:
| Yeah, agreed, long time user, just let my sub lapse. I don't
| like VSCode like I did IDEA but all the features are there, and
| more, much more. The AI integration and choices (Cursor, Trae,
| RooCode, Aide, Windsurf, PearAI, etc etc etc) are way better
| and honestly take the place of a lot of stuff Jetbrains had an
| advantage on. Also Jetbrains stuff is often not working or
| unreliable - developing within Docker containers, for one, and
| it keeps popping up with their shit AI assistant that you can't
| disable. Honestly, what is this, Clippy and MS Office?
| switch007 wrote:
| Agreed. Used to be excited about new versions now it's "great,
| what's going to be slow / broken" now
| insane_dreamer wrote:
| PyCharm with CoPilot plugin works well for me
| martinsnow wrote:
| I have the opposite experience. Intellij works well, fewer
| crashes and no ai crap that gets in my way. Too many developers
| rely on shitty ai crutches and you can easily snuff them out
| because their code is shit.
| oweiler wrote:
| Performance is one problem, but much worse are the countless
| bugs which plague the last releases.
| toprerules wrote:
| I'm a Vim user, but I occasionally try JetBrains/VSCode to see
| what I'm missing out on and RustRover, CLion, Goland etc. are by
| far the most sluggish pieces of software I've used. I am
| demonstrably slower on them than using Vim with my fuzzy finder,
| LSP, and AI integrations.
|
| I thought Fleet might add the "magic" to something more VSCode
| like, but I also don't understand the long term vision.
| the__alchemist wrote:
| Concur. I find that RustRover and PyCharm are outstanding in
| terms of refactoring, introspection, and treating projects as
| unified. But they are so slow. Lately, even copy+pasting may
| take seconds or longer. This and other actions sometimes
| terminate with an error about being too complex.
|
| Can't I have both power, and responsiveness?
| smittywerben wrote:
| IntelliJ IDEA is their real product. Once you've added a
| debugger, test runner, and decompiler then you're ready to
| program Java.
| sfn42 wrote:
| Pretty sure IntelliJ comes with all those things?
|
| That's why I use JB products. I download them, start them up
| and that's it. I don't need any separate plugins, they just
| work perfectly out of the box.
| k4rli wrote:
| Also probably part of the reason why they're so bloated.
| IDEA with just a single mid-sized project can and will take
| 10GB+ memory (simple java+gradle for spring or android).
| Out of the box it has ~100 plugins installed, most of which
| are useless for most people.
|
| It does work well but it's often too much and uses even
| more memory than vscodium.
| sfn42 wrote:
| Are you using the ram for something else? Would you
| prefer to have 30 out of 32gb sitting unused?
|
| Ram is cheap, I don't see why people complain that it's
| being utilized. Doesn't bother me at all.
|
| I haven't looked into it but I would assume you can
| disable these unnecessary plugins if you don't want them?
| toprerules wrote:
| It sounds like your perception of how a computer works is
| incredibly flawed. ram doesn't sit _unused_ , the kernel
| uses it for caching and locality. The more RAM you give
| the kernel, the more you can have resident in the slab
| cache, the page cache, the filesystem cache, the network
| backlog, etc. Even on very large machines with more RAM
| than an average desktop, the kernel can still make use of
| almost all of it.
|
| I work on efficiency so when people say things like "it's
| ok for my IDE to be an inefficient pile of garbage that
| locks up resources" it makes me wonder what kind of
| program they are producing.
| sfn42 wrote:
| I didn't say it's an inefficient pile of garbage. It's
| obviously making use of the memory in order to provide
| information and quick navigation etc.
|
| My computer works completely fine while I have multiple
| jetbrains ides and browser windows, Docker etc running.
|
| So maybe your perception is the one that's flawed. I know
| for a fact that my computer can handle it, but it seems
| like you mistakenly believe that it can't?
| mike_hearn wrote:
| You're both right. The issue here is that both the JVM
| and the kernel use algorithms that can use all your RAM
| to speed things up, and there's no good way to know which
| side should 'win' (to get the best performance).
|
| Historically the JVM will happily use all your RAM even
| if it doesn't need to, because that reduces the amount of
| GC work required which increases CPU time available to
| the IDE for analysis and other tasks. It can be told
| there's a limits, in which case it'll spend more time
| GCing to stay under it.
|
| Modern JVMs changed this old default and will wait until
| the app is idle then start reclaiming memory and
| releasing it back to the OS. I guess it depends what you
| mean by "mid sized" but 10GB is quite a bit. It'd be
| worth checking that everything is running on a recent
| JVM. Gradle in particular can be a hog if you run it on
| old JVMs.
| sfn42 wrote:
| I use Rider for .Net and WebStorm for JS. Before I left
| work I checked, with our small/medium sized project each
| of them were using a little under 2gb according to
| windows Task Manager. Adding in some other related
| processes I'd estimate the two combined might be using
| 5-6gb in total. So I have at least 26gb left over.
|
| To quote Lord Farquaad: That is a sacrifice I am willing
| to make
| nobleach wrote:
| Same. Although I haven't tried VSCode in a lot of years. I did
| at one time have it set up to emulate vim quite well. I used it
| as a daily driver for over 6 months. It would puke the bed at
| least once a day, reseting the theme, losing all keyboard
| shortcuts. I'd restart it and go on my merry way.
|
| I keep my Kotlin LSP for NeoVim up to date but it's just not a
| great experience. I often have to open IntelliJ to sort out
| import issues. The entire Java community is built on "don't
| worry about knowing where your imports are coming from, your
| IDE will do that magic for you". So much is this the case, that
| the first Manning Kotlin book even said it. Because of this, I
| was eager to give Fleet a shot. My impression was, "you won't
| build an LSP because you're afraid of losing revenue... but
| you'll build this?" Ok. I guess that makes sense - keep people
| on your playground.
|
| I sure do LOVE Kotlin as a language. But telling me I have to
| use your product to write it? I'd rather write Go... or even
| Typescript at that point. Both of those have really nice
| experiences in a simple text editor + LSP.
| jakebasile wrote:
| > In the past year, we've also observed significant advances in
| terms of approaches to application development, an area that we
| at JetBrains are also heavily investing in. Just recently, we
| announced a new coding agent named Junie.
|
| That agent must not be very helpful if it causes even the company
| creating it to be able to support less products.
| Apocryphon wrote:
| I am reminded of this comment made only two days ago about the
| deficiencies of the similar Kotlin Native project:
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42989406
| ashu1461 wrote:
| I wish Jet brains would give AI features for free for some time,
| Github co pilot will be incompatible with fleet for some time and
| even with other legacy jetbrain IDEs like webstorm / pycharm it
| does not work very well. They always release features for vs code
| first and then webstorm follows.
| ternaryoperator wrote:
| CoPilot has been working fairly well for me in GoLand. I don't
| know if Copilot has the same or more support in Goland than in
| Webstorm/Pycharm, so, if the latter, my observation might well
| be disjoint from yours.
|
| But so far, it's a moderately capable assistant. My biggest
| complaints with it have more to do with its responses than its
| fit with the IDE.
| ashu1461 wrote:
| Have you tried co pilot with vs code ?
| FrozenSynapse wrote:
| Copilot in VS Code has model options, the new agent is
| available in VSC Insiders that will implement full features
| and show it's changes in a diff viewer. Jetbrain IDEs don't
| have the option to change models
| gkedzierski wrote:
| And their default model is pretty bad in JS/TS world. (but
| great in C#) Copilot works great for every language but the
| plugin integration into JetBrains IDEs is not as deep.
| TiredOfLife wrote:
| Jetbrains ides have free local only full line completion
| jeroenhd wrote:
| The CPU-based one-line AI generated code is available without a
| subscription. I'd love for Jetbrains to make a slightly-
| upgraded version that runs on the GPU instead, but the single-
| line suggestions work fine for me.
|
| I don't think it makes sense for something as compute intense
| as cloud LLM code generation to be made available for free. I
| do wish I'd have the ability to connect IntelliJ to a local LLM
| instance without having to bother with custom plugins or
| Ollama, though. They're supposedly working on a locally-hosted
| LLM integration, but that'll be locked behind a subscription as
| well.
| jockm wrote:
| I just wish they would finaly fix KMP on Linux aarch64. It's been
| years now
| jockm wrote:
| Correction I meant Kotlin Native, my bad
| koakuma-chan wrote:
| I forgot Fleet existed.
| krick wrote:
| Most comments here either praise IDEA-variants as "outstanding",
| or blame it for being "slow and complicated", both of which feel
| odd to me (especially the first one). I strongly prefer JetBrains
| products over anything else, so if it's possible to use PyCharm,
| I will use PyCharm instead of Vim/VSCode. Yet I cannot imagine
| calling it outstanding. Maybe, that's just my bad character
| overall, but I just am surprised why is it that all IDEs/code
| editors suck so much. About 5 years ago, when LSP appeared
| (introduced by VSCode IIRC), many people predicted that soon they
| will far surpass IDEA's (and the likes) autocompletion, etc. And
| honestly, I believed them. Why wouldn't it? It seems like a
| simple task, once you have generic LSP functionality, the rest
| should be "just details", like finding/making good data source
| for particular language/lib/etc.
|
| And all that JetBrains IDEs do, _feels_ to me like a pretty
| simple stuff. Like all these refactoring options (pretty much the
| main reason why I prefer their IDEs over simpler editors, it
| feels like a natural extension of Vim keybindings: why should I
| do anything as simple as extracting a method manually?), it seems
| like a thing that should be easily scriptable once you have
| powerful code-editing API, so I feel annoyed by the fact they are
| pretty much "hard-coded" into IDE and I cannot easily add a
| couple of my own simple refactorings. BTW, they didn't really
| change over the last 5 years or so. Some bugs get fixed, static
| code analysis gets smarter and more specialized for a current
| version of some language, but nothing that would feel like real
| progress. It's hundreds of tiny distinct things, and it seems
| like that would progress much faster, if all these things were
| open-source plugins. As people predicted, when LSP came about.
| Yet apparently it doesn't, because as imperfect PyCharm is,
| VSCode cannot do even as much.
|
| So, basically, what distinguishes IDEA from anything else seem
| like super simple things, and it seems weird that for it it must
| compromise to use that clunky, configurable via UI (instead of
| neat JSON/TOML/whatever), memory-hungry IDE. And it still puzzles
| me. Of course, if it seems so simple, it's fair to ask why I
| didn't make my own yet. Well, yes, I didn't even look into it.
| But I just cannot understand, what's the hard problem that
| community struggles to solve, why all opensource or semi-
| opensource editors didn't leave clunky "traditioinal IDEs" far
| behind yet with regard to these core function, even though it
| seems those traditional IDEs haven't evolved for years?
| jeroenhd wrote:
| > I cannot easily add a couple of my own simple refactorings
|
| While this isn't as powerful as the full plugin API, there is
| Edit > Find > Replace Structurally which can be used to write
| some pretty complex code alterations, and you can save/load
| templates to reuse them later.
|
| IMO Jetbrains IDEs are the best IDEs. That doesn't make them
| amazing or great or outstanding. They have their bugs, their
| resource leaks, and sometimes just plain weird design
| decisions, but they're ahead of the competition by a long shot
| for many programming languages. Other IDEs can match what
| Jetbrains has to offer, but you have to install and configure
| every feature yourself, while the Jetbrains stuff mostly comes
| with batteries included.
| mike_hearn wrote:
| A lot of what you're talking about _is_ open source. Here 's
| the extract method refactoring (Version 2):
|
| https://github.com/JetBrains/intellij-community/tree/44a42be...
|
| As you can see it's not that easy. At the core of an IDE is a
| database that has to incrementally update itself based on real
| time edits that can arbitrarily break the datasource (code)
| that the database is modeling, often in highly confusing ways.
| Refactorings often require sophisticated data analysis in order
| to not break code themselves, they aren't simple at all.
|
| The LSP architecture complicates things further by introducing
| an asynchronous data structure synchronization problem between
| frontend and backend. Jetbrain's architecture is conventional,
| with analysis and UI running in-process. They can share data
| directly and use locks for mutual exclusion. The downside of
| this is that if locking isn't fine grained enough, or if the GC
| causes stalls, you can get UI hitches and sluggishness. The
| upside is that it's a pretty dramatic productivity upgrade
| because you aren't solving all these hard distributed computing
| problems that the LSP design introduces.
|
| So the question becomes who solves their problems first?
| Jetbrains and Oracle have done a ton of work in recent years on
| solving these problems. Java GC pause times have been driven
| down aggressively, now there are fully pauseless GCs available
| although I don't know if IDEA uses them yet. GC pauses haven't
| been visible for me in years at any rate. And Jetbrains have
| done lots of work over time to reduce the amount of lock
| contention that can cause UI stalls, to introduce limited
| amounts of asynchronous replication within the process and so
| on.
|
| The thing is, when you're in-process you can use the same ideas
| as in the LSP to reduce UI latency but to whatever extent makes
| sense or is necessary in a specific context. Nothing stops you
| tossing in an actor with a queue if you want that, or
| introducing a lock if a UI stall is in fact preferable to the
| alternatives (and sometimes it is). But you aren't bound to it
| all the time. Whereas the LSP design with separate processes
| and a hard address space separation doesn't allow that. To add
| anything you need to extend the protocol and handle the
| possibility of data skew between frontend and backend, which
| introduces a lot of surface area for bugs, which then drains
| time that could be spent on fixing refactoring bugs or adding
| new static analyses. So it's a hard tradeoff and one isn't
| clearly a winner to the other.
| sesm wrote:
| JB products have in-memory PSI (as opposed to LSP queried over
| network), and this PSI by it's nature is multi-language, so
| they support language injections naturally. This comes in very
| handy when you are writing an HTML file with embedded CSS and
| JS, or when you have inline HTML strings or regexps in your
| code.
| jillesvangurp wrote:
| Fleet was a strategy to counter vs code. As such it did not work
| that well. It's not feature complete enough to consider as an
| intellij alternative and a bit too different for vs code users to
| take serious. So, easy to see why they are pulling the plug on
| that.
|
| Vs Code of course is the wider ecosystem of plugin compatible
| editors based on the vs codium platform. This includes a lot of
| the recent AI editors, and several non vs codium based editors
| that can integrate the plugins (e.g. vi).
|
| The core issue is that Fleet is outside of that ecosystem and
| doesn't have the community or user adoption to get that fixed.
| It's a chicken egg problem that's hard to fix. It's being pulled
| two directions. On one hand you have existing intellij users who
| use that to do most of their development. And on the other hand
| you have people that are using vs code and depend on a lot of its
| plugins. Fleet is a bit of an empty room for both groups of
| users. None of my more serious projects load correctly in fleet.
| I've tried it a few times and it's just missing too much stuff
| for me to take it seriously. And I bet VS Code users would be
| equally unhappy.
|
| Fixing that would involve bringing over the majority of features
| from intellij and vs code, and recreating those in fleet. Which
| of course wasn't really happening given that it's being
| positioned as a closed source platform.
|
| IMHO keeping Fleet closed source was the mistake that doomed the
| whole effort from day 1. In short, they were on their own and not
| really able to pull that off. Google is understandably focusing
| on supporting intellij, which at least has an open source core.
| Providing an open source core for intellij in 2009 was the key
| enabler that allowed them to move from eclipse to intellij.
| Google embraded it in 2013. Some of the older people here might
| remember that Android Studio started out on the Eclipse platform.
| Eclipse support ended in 2015. Open source is what made that
| transition possible.
|
| Which of course raises the question what the whole point of a
| closed source Fleet was given that users, plugin developers, and
| major partners like Google are all focus on the open source
| ecosystem around intellij. And the rest of the ecosystem is vs
| code based.
|
| Answer: there is none. Hence this foregone conclusion.
| brap wrote:
| >With Fleet you can collaborate on code in real time
|
| Genuine question - Does anyone actually do this? What for?
|
| I have been writing code for about 25 years and not once did I
| wish for someone else to start editing the same files I'm editing
| in real time. Yet, this seems like a huge selling point for some
| of these editors.
| solardev wrote:
| It's helpful for mentoring or pair programming with another
| person. They can more clearly see the code as you change it,
| like Google Docs, rather than just watching a screenshare.
| okr wrote:
| "Code with me", is still a feature i use in IntelliJ. Never
| used fleet.
| SkyPuncher wrote:
| It's a nice bonus, but it's certainly not a critical feature.
|
| In every instance, I've needed this I've already been on a Zoom
| call and can simply ask the other person to push their code.
| nobleach wrote:
| I've used it a total of 2 times since I first saw the ability
| in Atom back in 2017. Once was more for the "this seems neat,
| let's try it" factor. The other was a legitimate, let's
| troubleshoot an issue while staring at the same massive screen
| together. It's not a bad feature, it just never stuck with my
| workflow - I typically hop on a Zoom call now days, someone
| shares their screen and pair program the old fashioned way (by
| yelling out stuff like one does when someone else is playing
| solitaire)
| VPenkov wrote:
| I've been working for the same company for over 7 years and a
| lot of the shared code that other developers use is mine.
|
| Frequently I would guide other developers to implementing
| something and in doing so I'd guide them down to what files to
| open and how to integrate it. I find this process a lot more
| convenient over Zoom where I can annotate with a pencil. I use
| that to underline blocks of code. It's a bit like you have a
| mouse and I have a mouse on the same screen but in a nice way.
|
| In a workflow like that I sometimes want to write pseudo code
| and I would very much welcome a feature like that. Currently
| JetBrains has a "Code with me" plugin or something similar, but
| it's a bit laggy and struggles when fast typers meet. And a
| feature like that is good both when I take my laptop and sit
| next to you, and when we're on Zoom while talking.
| muixoozie wrote:
| Same. I've only used collaborative tools like Google Docs with
| other people exactly once in college for a group report.
| Naturally we procrastinated so long that we were knocking it
| out the day it was due. I must say it did a good job adding
| momentum.
|
| Other than that never in my professional experience as a
| programmer. Except for open source work I was helping with. 3
| of us would meet on Jitsi main contributor would sometimes
| share an SSH session with us in addition to streaming live
| coding sessions. Don't recall it actually being useful though.
| Dunno. It's probably one of those features that if it works
| well and is easy, then I might use it more.
| giancarlostoro wrote:
| You've never been on one computer with another developer and
| eventually just hand them the keyboard? (or Vice-Versa) Or on a
| work call sharing your screen, where you give them remote
| control of your screen? (or vice-versa) This is a way to let
| someone else collaborate with you, within their configured IDE,
| with their preferred plugins and tooling configuration.
|
| If you don't do any peer programming, then you wouldn't
| understand it.
| smrtinsert wrote:
| It was an experiment at one company I had for maybe 6 mo and
| failed miserably. Also a coder here for ~20 years. Code was
| slightly less error prone and slightly more predictable in LOE
| but productivity dropped massively. Most importantly all the
| developers hated it.
| rhubarbtree wrote:
| Anyone wondering whether JetBrains IDEs are still worth it -
| absolute yes from me. VS code is a UX mess by comparison.
| Webstorm can be tricky to configure with Typescript but once it's
| setup my goodness it's good.
| bayindirh wrote:
| Unfortunately many new developers don't believe in powerful
| "power" tools anymore. They like to connect many small tools
| for an inferior experience and they just scoff at bigger tools
| for being "too complicated".
|
| I use another big tool which is around 20 years old, and that
| can do everything and a ton more from a single screen at the
| same speed or faster, with greater integration.
|
| Yet people don't touch it because it's old, complex, looks ugly
| and its UI is too dense.
|
| Oh, I forgot, it also includes a learning curve, but the same
| people devote their lives to "rice" their Vim installations for
| months.
| lpapez wrote:
| In my case it is because I am wary of these tools breaking in
| a way which cannot be fixed, or services being suddenly
| revoked for external reasons.
|
| Example: now that I'm a solopreneur I use JetBrains DataGrip,
| and overall I am very pleased with it. But I couldn't have it
| on my previous two jobs. One of the jobs restricted my work
| computer to only allow MySQL Workbench (arbitrary Powershell
| scripts also were allowed, of course), and the other one
| didn't want to pay for a licence, no matter how much I
| pleaded.
|
| So before I had to make due with (admittedly) inferior tools
| because they were free and available as the lowest common
| denominator in the general workplace.
|
| Being comfortable with the tools affects a large part of my
| productivity, and I'm more productive with a crappy-but-
| familiar toolbox than I am with the unknown spaceship.
| bayindirh wrote:
| All of the tools I use are free software and actively
| maintained and updated, plus they have very nice logging,
| so I can diagnose what's happening. I only needed to read
| the logs because I was young and experimenting with the
| parts I shouldn't and broke the thing on purpose. However,
| you can just create a copy of the installation directory to
| back it up completely.
|
| Again, the tool I gave as an example has integrated
| configuration snapshots, and if something breaks I can
| revert to a config 2 seconds or 2 years before, including
| component versions installed at that time.
|
| To be honest, I probably used that feature at most two
| times in the last 20 years.
|
| Workplace restrictions something off-limits and I can't
| tell anything about. The people I gave examples are persons
| I know and they have no such restrictions in place.
| anoother wrote:
| What's the tool?
| bayindirh wrote:
| Eclipse. Coincidentally used as the Java LSP for VSCode, in
| headless configuration.
| ipaddr wrote:
| Your not using rational rose to rad up your Java app?
| bayindirh wrote:
| I'm not writing Java for the last ten years or so.
| Instead Eclipse handles all the other things I use.
| doublepg23 wrote:
| OP
| mring33621 wrote:
| Visual Age for Java
| ptero wrote:
| That, to me, is a feature, not a bug.
|
| Switching from a large, complex tool that includes a learning
| curve is expensive. You set a high bar for switching from
| Eclipse because you are used to it, paid a learning price and
| are productive in it. And you are right. But that also means
| that picking such a tool from a multitude of options should
| be done after careful consideration, which is exactly what
| using smaller tools provides.
|
| On a somewhat related note, I want my professional software
| to _only_ provide a (great) speedup of development. I want
| them to only do what I could do without them (even if it
| takes a week instead of a minute). This means I can often
| look at things that fail to work and understand what is
| failing. This is also helped by new engineers starting with
| smaller tools and building up to integrated, distributed
| tools only after knowing how individual elements work and can
| be connected. Integrating with a (good) big tool is then not
| a fight as it brings a "wow" moment -- "instead of doing all
| this by hand I can do it with a few mouseclicks!". My 2c.
| bayindirh wrote:
| [Talking from the perspective of Eclipse, because it's the
| only IDE I invested my time in]
|
| In this case, it's not. Eclipse put Integrated into IDE,
| but doesn't subtract transparency in the process. You can
| see what it does, tweak every step meticulously if you
| want, and return to defaults with one click, if you prefer.
|
| What this transparency brings is mental flexibility and
| understanding. Do I want or need to switch? I'm doing the
| same thing in Vim or KATE of BBEdit in 15 minutes. Maybe I
| stumble with a couple of shortcuts, but that's not a
| problem.
|
| The funny thing is I see the compiler command every time I
| press build, so it's burned in my memory after a day. While
| I can read valgrind outputs and understand what it says,
| Eclipse highlights the lines automatically, so I'm faster.
| While I can gnuplot performance graphs, Eclipse auto-builds
| them so they are on my desktop after a 10 hour torture run.
|
| In my case, Eclipse enables me to carry a whole toolbox and
| more in a single folder, yet all the tools it uses and what
| it does is so transparent that I can switch away on an
| instant if I don't get my installation with me, or I'm
| connecting to a server in a datacenter far, far away.
|
| I don't like to be blindsided by my tools. I like
| blinkenligths in a way, and Eclipse gives me these
| blinkenlights while being highly automatic.
|
| So while I understand your case, it doesn't apply to
| Eclipse, at least, because it's not a strangler, but a
| great enabler and HUD in my experience.
|
| For the time investing part, I don't grind. I get a tool,
| and start using it, and when it becomes limiting, I start
| poking it and learn what feature solves that problem at
| hand. By that way, I learn the tool as I go, and if the
| tool can't expand to my needs at some point, it fades away
| from use gracefully. I don't do "stop, drop, roll" thing
| while changing tools, so I can't paint a timeline about
| when I picked a tool and dropped another.
| cogman10 wrote:
| I think the big drawback to eclipse is it's a beast to
| get setup correctly before it performs well. It's built
| to support everything, but really does a pretty poor job
| out of the box.
|
| I primarily do Java development. I started with eclipse,
| fell away because at the time it had pretty awful maven
| support. Moved over to Netbeans which has pretty good
| maven and java support, but went through a somewhat
| "unsupported" period of time and ultimately I moved over
| to intellij.
|
| Intellij has been a joy to work with in Java code bases
| because everything just works and the smart features are
| actually worth it. Intellij can do pretty major refactors
| that both netbeans and eclipse can't think of. Further,
| it has really good code improvement suggestions that
| neither eclipse nor netbeans had. I can also simply check
| out any code base and tell intellij to open it and be up
| and running immediately.
|
| A yellow line in intellij is almost certainly something
| you can right click on and hit "make better" and you'll
| have better and easier to understand code as a result.
|
| All that said, you sound like you are working with a
| C/C++ environment. I've not done a lot with Intellijs
| clion so I couldn't tell you how comparable it is. It
| wouldn't shock me to learn eclipse is better as intellij
| is really well built for dynamic languages, maybe not so
| much for statically compiled languages.
| ernst_klim wrote:
| > Unfortunately many new developers don't believe in powerful
| "power" tools anymore.
|
| I have to use IntelliJ due to Kotlin codebase, but I'm still
| more of a fun of Emacs and I don't like Idea that much. I
| think IDEs somewhat lack the power that simpler tools have,
| which is automation.
|
| One thing I miss from IntelliJ is programmability. That's why
| I still use Emacs on workplace for anything outside of Kotlin
| (git, grepping, note-taking etc). I even edit code in Emacs
| from time to time when it's easier to write a Lisp function
| which will batch edit code than doing keyboard macro.
|
| Another thing I'm missing from IntelliJ is determinism.
| Everything is asynchronous, so the same combinations of
| actions can lead to different results, making automatisation
| painful.
| billfruit wrote:
| There are things missing from Emacs too. Intelligent
| project and context aware auto-complete. Project wide
| search that works out of the box.
| mike_hearn wrote:
| You might find this interesting:
|
| https://dmitrykandalov.com/liveplugin
|
| IntelliJ is very programmable, but it can be a bit
| intimidating because out of the box it assumes that you
| want to program it by creating plugins. That's very
| different to the elisp REPL driven approach. LivePlugin
| bridges the gap by letting you control the IDE from a repl-
| like console, building up scriptlets that use the same
| plugin APIs. There are examples for how to do things like
| add menu items, explore the semantic PSI trees, trigger
| refactorings or do whatever else you want to do.
| Nullabillity wrote:
| Also, IdeaVim is just awful compared to Evil.
|
| - Tracks the mode globally (rather than per editor), and
| treats mode-switching as an edit operation (so if you
| accidentally enter a read-only tab in insert mode then you
| need to _switch to another tab, escape, and then go back_
| to get your keybinds back.
|
| - Doesn't bind escape in sidebar dialogs, so trying to exit
| insert mode in a terminal or commit dialog just defocuses
| the sidebar instead
|
| - Still applies its other binds, so even falling back to
| CUA/IntelliJ keybinds doesn't work either!
|
| - Makes no effort to integrate IntelliJ keybinds, all you
| get for conflicts is "would you like to lose the Vim or
| IntelliJ functionality that binds this key?"
|
| The difference is stark when you compare it to something
| like Evil that actually values the user experience. (How's
| that for an irony?)
| flir wrote:
| That's not a young/old axis, it's a loose/tight coupling
| axis.
|
| (Thirty years in, still using IDEs as glorified text editors,
| still dropping to vim on a regular basis.)
| golly_ned wrote:
| Such vim/emacs configuration aficionados are engaging in a
| hobby, some under the pretense that it'll make them more
| effective, but many simply for the fun of it.
| RockRobotRock wrote:
| I feel like I "earned" the right to use big ugly IDE after
| learning the underlying complexity the hard way, but that's
| only for one language.
|
| Jumping into a new language with JetBrains is the difference
| between me spending 2 hours figuring out a codebase and
| submitting a PR, and me spending 2 hours fucking around
| trying to fix things.
| bayindirh wrote:
| An IDE generally adds another complexity layer, esp. if
| you're not experienced in the language, that's true. Maybe
| the reason I didn't feel that was the gradual ramp up in
| using the IDE, and starting to play with a language in the
| terminal first.
|
| I still don't use an IDE for projects up to a certain size,
| but after a certain point, being able to also store all the
| nitty gritty bits about a project (building, profiles,
| environment, flags, etc.) in a project saves more time than
| it requires to set them up.
| Kuinox wrote:
| The UX of Jetbrains IDE is objectively worse, I will take Rider
| as example (since I use it everyday).
|
| We can start with basic things: the contrast, in default
| settings in dark mode for both. In theses conditions, Rider
| contrast is too low for a screen you have to stare all the day,
| compared to VS Code.
|
| Commonly used item are in sub menus (in vscode they are sorted
| by most commonly items on top), common shortcuts requires
| finger gymnastics.
| buggy6257 wrote:
| So your arguments that it's "objectively bad" are
|
| - it has bad defaults for theme (which I bet most devs change
| immediately anyways on every IDE)
|
| - "common items" (which when unspecified could be assumed to
| be subjective to each persons workflow) are hidden in
| submenus?
|
| - "common shortcuts" (again unspecified) require stretching
| (again, something trivially changed)
|
| Unless you have more these feel not only extremely weak but
| extremely subjective. Please avoid trying to phrase your
| opinions as some fact it's a tiring trope these days.
| Kuinox wrote:
| The fact that's the contrast is bad isn't something
| subjective, the font rendering is also shit and reduce the
| contrast further. This is an accessibility issue, not some
| subjective problem.
| buggy6257 wrote:
| Allow me to be more clear then:
|
| - "default theme sucks and is bad accessibility". On its
| own this is objectively provable of course except when
| you're talking about probably the single most commonly
| changed setting in a coders primary IDE other than maybe
| font. Calling the app objectively bad because it chose a
| bad default theme that gets immediately changed is a weak
| take
|
| - "hidden menu options" this is the subjective one as I
| called out unless you can provide examples that are
| universal.
|
| - "bad keyboard shortcuts" is subjective for the most
| part but even still is a widely changed option and very
| easy to fix. So calling the app objectively bad for this
| is also a weak take.
| Kuinox wrote:
| You can select a simple metric, practicality, that will
| be objective.
|
| The items in VS Code are sorted the chance you have to
| use it depending of the context. In rider, commonly used
| items are in submenu (rename hiding in refactoring), less
| commonly used items are not in the submenus.
|
| For the keyboard shorcuts, again you can argue
| practicality as an objective metric. The number of keys
| for a combo and distance between the keys have a big
| practicality factor, and Jetbrains IDEs loves F-keys
| (that you can't reach if you hold a keyboard like
| ergonomists recommends)
| bayindirh wrote:
| I believe all of them are configurable in Rider, no?
| Kuinox wrote:
| You can also configure the VS Code UX.
| bayindirh wrote:
| That's not the question. The question was "you can change
| the toolbars and shortcuts in JetBrains Rider, no?"
|
| I presume the answer is yes, from what you said. Then it
| becomes less of an issue, if not an non-issue.
|
| IDEs and code editors are tools which we live with for a
| long time. Nobody expects their defaults to be unchanged.
| Otherwise we'd be all using notepad.exe for coding.
|
| Not having the defaults organized by your tastes is not a
| valid reason for disqualifying a tool out of the gate.
|
| As a counter example, Electron's font rendering is
| nothing to drool over, from my perspective, and doesn't
| give an extra point for using it in my case.
| Kuinox wrote:
| > Nobody expects their defaults to be unchanged.
|
| The OC point was that VS Code UX "is a mess by
| comparison", and VS Code UX is fully configurable,
| therefor if you have a problem with VS Code UX, you are
| complaining about it's defaults settings.
|
| Also Jetbrains IDEs font rendering is simply awful, it
| doesn't hold the comparison to electron:
| https://i.imgur.com/u4ZV2Kd.png
| Nullabillity wrote:
| An IDE's literal whole selling point _is_ supposedly
| being a packaged product that you can just pick up and
| run with, at the price of not being particularly good at
| any of the things it does (and usually being pretty
| expensive).
|
| If you still need to customize everything then, well,
| what did you actually gain over assembling your
| environment by yourself from actually competent pieces?
| bayindirh wrote:
| I don't think so, because the IDE doesn't carry the
| language tooling with it, but interfaces with the tooling
| you already have in place.
|
| That said, every IDE is opinionated about workflows, and
| if you're open to adapt to that, the defaults makes
| sense. Otherwise you slowly hammer it to the shape you
| want.
|
| For me an IDEs greatest selling point or the infinite
| flexibility it provides.
| MissTake wrote:
| "objectively bad"
|
| No, it's subjectively bad for you.
|
| It really grinds my gears when people use "objectively" when
| being objective is to deal purely in unbiased observable,
| repeatable facts.
|
| Your justification starts first with screen contrast -
| something that is truly in the eye of the beholder.
|
| Then you go on about "finger gymnastics" for shortcuts -
| again something that you (and yes I don't disagree others as
| well) suffer from.
|
| Neither are issues that have bothered me one iota - so much
| so that your mention is really the first time I've thought
| about either.
|
| However you then compare this to another app that also has
| many detractors thus creating an instant bias.
| Kuinox wrote:
| The amount of contrast can be measured.
| https://developer.mozilla.org/en-
| US/docs/Web/Accessibility/U...
|
| Due to the poor font rendering and colors picked in Rider,
| by default there is a contrast of 4.77 which is just meet
| the minimum ratio, and for an app you stare all the day at,
| it's not enough.
|
| From the firefox docs:
|
| > Having good color contrast on your site benefits all your
| users
|
| It's written _all your users_ , it's not subjective.
| MissTake wrote:
| "minimum ratio"
|
| Which is what? Is it a well defined fact?
| Kuinox wrote:
| It's defined in the document I linked. And yes, it's a
| well defined fact.
| MissTake wrote:
| > When designing readable interfaces for different vision
| capabilities, the WCAG guidelines recommend the following
| contrast ratios
|
| So, they're recommendations, not facts.
|
| A fact is not a recommendation.
|
| You can cling to this until the cows come home, but
| anything visual is dependent on the viewer. It's not a
| fact. It's subjective.
| Kuinox wrote:
| What you say are words not facts too. It's your opinion,
| wrong but still your opinion.
| MissTake wrote:
| I'm simply stating that for something to be objective it
| has to be an absolute irrefutable fact.
|
| Anything else is subjective.
|
| A UI can never be objectively bad because it is based
| upon how someone sees it.
|
| For me, Gimp has a subjectivity bad UI because I've never
| been able to get my head around it.
|
| Other people find it's perfect and that it's really easy
| to use.
|
| Both statements are subjective.
|
| "Objective" and "subjective" are both words that have
| well defined accepted dictionary definitions.
| Kuinox wrote:
| I suggest you to read some research on UX so you can
| understand that a big part of UX is in fact, not
| subjective. Like poor contrast cause reading fatigue on
| all humans, but at varying level. And that researchers
| determined a contrast ratio at which a certain percentage
| of the population can read without problems. And yes
| that's a recommendation because they can't force you to
| do it, so they recommand you to do it.
| alde wrote:
| I have moved to VScode after being a paying Jetbrains customer
| for 6 years. The Jetbrains IDEs are clunky and slow, they also
| have plenty of bugs which remain open for years. They do offer
| some really powerful refactoring capabilities but I don't miss
| them.
|
| Most of my work is in Go, Rust and Typescript.
|
| I was told by Jetbrains representatives that Fleet is now
| deprioritized internally, which is a pity.
| joshstrange wrote:
| I could not be happier that they are deprioritizing fleet. I
| am not a fan of the VS code style editor and that's all I saw
| fleet as.
| nicce wrote:
| > they also have plenty of bugs which remain open for years.
|
| I switch to Jetbrains from time to time because there are
| many impassable serious bugs in VSCode, on the other hand...
| jbreckmckye wrote:
| This seems strange to me because honestly I find the Goland
| experience much better than Go in VSCode. But - clearly it
| works for you
| damidekronik wrote:
| Love Webstorm, but I am having constant problems with type
| hints. Typescript with a solid setup that over time stopped
| working well.
| nedsma wrote:
| Contrary to that, I used Jetbrains IDEs for a decade, or even
| longer, and recently I have switched to VS Code for my Go and
| TypeScript work. Sometimes less is more.
| insane_dreamer wrote:
| PyCharm is excellent; have not found anything as good for heavy
| python development
|
| update: emphasis on "heavy". It's good for python projects. For
| some one-off script I'm more likely to use Zed. pyCharm
| indexing drives me nuts sometimes. But Zed lacks the features
| that I use in pyCharm for larger projects.
| niemandhier wrote:
| Telling the indexed to only index env packages and ignore
| system packages
| dboreham wrote:
| I switched to VSCode a couple of years ago.
| tehbeard wrote:
| Intellij is alright. Can't speak for Webstorm l.
|
| Phpstorm ran out of chances I'll give it. Last three tries all
| went the same way, permanently stuck indexing a project and
| being an overdeveloped notepad.exe during that; when vscode and
| phpintelphense could go from cold boot to code assist in
| seconds on the same project.
| smrtinsert wrote:
| Agreed. VScode is fine for me as a markdown editor/log
| viewer/advanced text editor, but when its time to develop, I
| can't imagine doing without the IDEA Ultimate productivity
| boost.
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| Why not use something fast and doesn't spy, like np++ or
| geany as a simple editor?
| cmrdporcupine wrote:
| Their tools are fantastic and worth the $$ and having worked in
| the profession for 25 years I have little patience for the
| variety of elitism I often encounter on jobs that goes along
| the line of: "I just use vim and (by implication) so should
| you."
|
| JetBrains has always had issues with performance and slightly
| clunky UI. But in return there's just a pile of amazing
| refactoring and analysis tools that nobody else offers.
|
| I pay for tools that make my job easier so I can concentrate on
| delivering. Working without RustRover or CLion is just
| unpleasant.
|
| I have an emacs + LSP + Rustic etc configuration which does
| about 80% of what I can do with RustRover. But it's brittle,
| slow, and takes work to maintain. VSCode suffers from similar
| problems (not slow, but brittle and ergonomics are worse).
| dehrmann wrote:
| > elitism I often encounter on jobs that goes along the line
| of: "I just use vim and (by implication) so should you."
|
| This always felt to me like an old-school woodworker saying
| you can do a large project with hand tools.
| packetlost wrote:
| I use RustRover for the excellent debugging and git experience,
| but quickly go back to neovim + rust-analyzer when I'm writing
| code, not debugging it.
| thesurlydev wrote:
| Yes. Absolutely. But with one caveat: JetBrains is clearly
| lagging behind in AI features and none of the 30+ LLM plugins
| come close to the killer feature of Codeium's Windsurf
| (Cascade). For this reason, I've been using both Windsurf and
| JetBrains in concert which is a pain but works for now.
|
| I have high hopes for "Junie" but fear it's going to be a while
| before it's ready for prime time.
| RockRobotRock wrote:
| I'm dipping my toes into AI features with JetBrains'
| assistant subscription. What am I missing out on?
| FpUser wrote:
| I work with many tools from JetBrains with the main one being
| CLion. I think in average their tools are superior to anything
| else on the market.
| Timon3 wrote:
| I'll quote an earlier comment of mine written a couple of
| months ago (with links to the issue tracker)[0], because -
| after many years of being a happy JetBrains user - I sadly can
| no longer recommend the IDEs (some worse than others, Rider has
| been okay, though new features often just don't work at all),
| since the quality of QA has gotten very bad over the last
| couple of years:
|
| - The autocomplete popup sometimes froze the IDE completely
| (and killing the process caused minutes of data loss), open for
| close to a year
|
| - Since two months ago, the Typescript language server fails to
| start in Vue projects (due to a broken update by the Vue team).
| A fixed version of WebStorm was released yesterday, in the
| meantime you were apparently expected to search for the error
| message, stumble upon the YouTrack page, and apply a workaround
|
| - Performance is abysmal in a larger React MUI project, think
| 10-15 seconds for feedback on code changes, sometimes errors
| just stick around for a good minute or more, or even stay until
| you manually remove all code and put it back
|
| - In some situations WebStorm makes autocomplete suggestions
| that aren't allowed - think effectively a type T with keys K |
| L, where Omit<T, K> leads to only suggesting K properties,
| while removing the Omit makes it suggest both K and L
| properties
|
| - After updating from 2024.1.X to 2024.2.Y, the window had no
| buttons for minimizing/maximizing anymore. Now, this was
| partially caused by my environment, but after I found a
| workaround it was closed as "Third Party Problem". Still feels
| like a regression to me, since my environment did not change.
|
| I've mostly stopped updating the IDE, as almost every version
| brings new regressions in basic editor features. This morning I
| updated and tried to copy some text. WebStorm showed me a
| "Copying..." dialogue for more than 30 seconds.
|
| [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41939833
| dehrmann wrote:
| In my first job, I used C, vi, and cscope. In my second, Java
| and Eclipse. I was an order of magnitude more productive with
| an IDE. Some of it was the language (though I was actually
| pretty good at C and rusty at Java), but most of it came from
| the rapid feedback loop and improved code discoverability.
| barrenko wrote:
| Does this apply to Fleet as well?
| mystified5016 wrote:
| Jetbrains has been my go-to recommendation for years.
|
| Unfortunately they are forcing a VSCode UI on everyone and
| outright lying about their adoption figures (claiming it's off
| by default and everyone actively chose to use it). The new UI
| is just as much a broken mess as VSCode. The only way I can get
| work done is by using my fallback license for the 2023
| versions.
|
| It is apparently _inconceivable_ to JetBrains that power users
| exist and pay good money for power user tools. JetBrains only
| cares about VSCode script kiddies anymore.
| zenlot wrote:
| I just tried Cursor, which is based on vscode. And I couldn't
| stand it, back to JetBrains in a week. Everything, just
| everything is inferior. Starting with Git plugins, search etc.
| So yes, learn the ide, just use JetBrains.
| andyjohnson0 wrote:
| Actual title is "Kotlin Multiplatform Tooling - Shifting Gears".
| Decabytes wrote:
| I personally find value in having two editors. A light editor
| like Emacs for writing Markdown, git, quick scripts, and a
| JetBrains IDE for longer running projects, and debugging. I don't
| feel the need to wholly replace one with the other
| insane_dreamer wrote:
| Same here. I use SublimeText, or more recently, Zed, for quick-
| and-dirty stuff.
| John23832 wrote:
| Same. I basically run a Cursor/RustRover combo. I think the RR
| tooling is second to none.
| nvarsj wrote:
| After decades using Emacs and Idea, I have post traumatic
| configuration syndrome.
|
| So now I use VSCode and lazyvim/neovim. Which I can install
| anywhere in about 5 minutes and have a fully working environment
| with 0 effort and 1 breakage a year. It's great.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-02-12 23:02 UTC)