-
-
Save munificent/9749671 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
You appear to be advocating a new: | |
[ ] cloud-hosted [ ] locally installable [ ] web-based [ ] browser-based [ ] language-agnostic | |
[ ] language-specific IDE. Your IDE will not succeed. Here is why it will not succeed. | |
You appear to believe that: | |
[ ] Syntax highlighting is what makes programming difficult | |
[ ] Garbage collection is free | |
[ ] Computers have infinite memory | |
[ ] Nobody really needs: | |
[ ] a REPL [ ] debugger support [ ] a local filesystem | |
[ ] to interact with code not written in your IDE's preferred language | |
[ ] The entire world speaks 7-bit ASCII | |
[ ] Scaling up to large software projects will be easy | |
[ ] Convincing programmers to adopt a new IDE will be easy | |
[ ] Convincing programmers to adopt a language-specific IDE will be easy | |
[ ] Programmers love learning new keybindings | |
[ ] There is only one operating system and it is | |
[ ] OS X [ ] Windows [ ] Linux [ ] iOS [ ] Android [ ] the DOM | |
Unfortunately, your IDE (has/lacks): | |
[ ] vi keybindings | |
[ ] emacs keybindings | |
[ ] Syntax highlighting | |
[ ] User-configurable indentation | |
[ ] Macros | |
[ ] Written in JavaScript | |
[ ] but only JSON | |
[ ] Written in a scripting language you made up | |
[ ] which is a Lisp | |
[ ] A windowing system | |
[ ] Version control | |
[ ] Only using git [ ] only using github.com [ ] not using git | |
[ ] using an RCS of your own devising | |
[ ] Its own platform-independent look-and-feel | |
[ ] that was designed by a programmer | |
[ ] based on yesterday's design fads | |
[ ] applied inconsistently | |
[ ] A look and feel specific to one operating system | |
[ ] that was last widely used in 1989 | |
[ ] and was known to cause seizures | |
The following philosophical objections apply: | |
[ ] Programmers should not need to understand CSS to change their font | |
[ ] The most significant program written using your IDE is itself | |
[ ] The most significant program written using your IDE isn't even itself | |
[ ] Graphical programming presumes programmers can draw pictures better | |
than they can type words | |
[ ] The implementation is closed-source | |
[ ] covered by patents [ ] not owned by you | |
[ ] The DOM is not an application framework | |
[ ] The name of your IDE makes it impossible to find on Google | |
[ ] Your IDE assumes JavaScript can be made infinitely fast | |
[ ] You seem to think static analysis is worthless | |
Your implementation has the following flaws: | |
[ ] JavaScript is not faster than C, C++, or Java | |
[ ] The DOM is not a windowing framework | |
[ ] It crashes on any file larger than 32k | |
[ ] You provide no way for users to run the program they are editing | |
[ ] You require the user to check in code before it can be run | |
[ ] The IDE crashes if you look at it funny | |
[ ] You don't seem to understand basic optimization techniques | |
[ ] You think a single string is an acceptable data type for a text editor | |
Additionally, your marketing has the following problems: | |
[ ] Unsupported claims of increased productivity | |
[ ] Unsupported claims of greater "ease of use" | |
[ ] Obviously faked screenshots | |
[ ] No one really believes that your IDE is faster than: | |
[ ] vi [ ] emacs [ ] Eclipse [ ] Visual Studio [ ] IntelliJ [ ] Notepad | |
[ ] Rejection of orthodox user interface design without justification | |
[ ] Rejection of usability principles without justification | |
[ ] Rejection of established platform conventions without justification | |
[ ] Rejection of basic user interaction without justification | |
Taking the wider ecosystem into account, I would like to note that: | |
[ ] Your example workflow would be one key command in: _______________________ | |
[ ] We already have an IDE in the browser | |
[ ] We already have an IDE that can be scripted using | |
[ ] Python [ ] JavaScript [ ] A Lisp [ ] Lua | |
[ ] You have reinvented vi but worse | |
[ ] You have reinvented emacs but worse | |
[ ] You have reinvented TextMate but worse | |
[ ] You have reinvented Eclipse but worse | |
[ ] You have reinvented Notepad but worse | |
[ ] You have reinvented Notebad better, but that's still no justification | |
[ ] You have reinvented ed but non-ironically | |
In conclusion, this is what I think of you: | |
[ ] You have some interesting ideas, but this won't fly. | |
[ ] This is a bad IDE, and you should feel bad for creating it. | |
[ ] Programming in this IDE is an adequate punishment for inventing it. |
While it is true this gist comes uncomfortably close to describng Eclipse in many ways, it is not inevitable that an IDE, even a new one, must repeat what's wrong with Eclipse.
I badly want to write something really useful in HolyC. Wish I had the time.
Looks like "TempleOS" couldn't decide whether it was going to be a bland, tasteless, or just over-exerted effort on trying to mock religion.
Whatever the case, it's certainly a jerk that hijacked the thread.
Anything with an extensible enough customization language will eventually grow to be fully self-hosting. This includes IDE customization options.
@nova-tex According to someone on /r/programming the author of TempleOS suffers from schizophrenia. That's probably why he comes across as a bit unstable.
Hi Terry you are cool and TempleOS is awesome.