Ruby and IDE

ruby-talk
61

Kent, what I meant to say was:
"We don't have a syntactic-based editor for Ruby yet. I think anyone
who's used one for Java will tell you they definitely *need* it for
*Java* development. Perhaps some people will feel the same way if we
have such an editor for Ruby ..."

Anyway, a diversity of approaches to Ruby editors like we have now can
only be a good thing for Ruby.

Kent Sibilev wrote:

···

I'm using Intellij IDEA on my full-time job and I definitely can say
that I *don't* need an IDEA like IDE for Ruby. I've been programming
Ruby since 2000 and vim is all I need.

Kent.

Rob . wrote:
> Austin Ziegler wrote:
> > I don't use an IDE in Ruby -- even for some big projects that I'm
> > working on -- because I don't *need* an IDE in Ruby.
> > ... Ruby doesn't *need* an IDE.
>
> We don't have a syntactic-based editor for Ruby yet. I think for
> anyone who's used one for Java will tell you they definitely *need* it
> for development. Perhaps the same will be true for Ruby in the future
> ...
>
> Rob
> http://www.jedit.org/ruby/
>

62

what features do a "properly embedded shell" have that a simple
"screen"-split at console (or simply multiple windows open) do not? I'm
not being sarcastic, i just want to know what i could be missing...

I also use this windows manager called "ratpoison" which takes care of
multiple windows for me flawlessly.

···

On Sat, 30 Apr 2005 03:32:32 +0900, "tsuraan" <tsuraan@xyons.net> said:

Yeah, I tend to do work in console mode, so one vim with splits and
vsplits (1280x1024 console), and a bunch of terminals work reasonably
well. Still, a properly embedded shell would be cool.

63

Oh i can think about a lot more. A good profiler for speed and memory
is necessary. Code coverage also, especially when integrated together
with unit testing. Project based settings are important. Good version
control integration and a much improved irb. Better handling of
multiple files (when you have 300 files in a project editors become
very hard to use). Interation of a HTTP testing framework and a lot of
other things....

64

What's so scary about lisp code? Wanna show me some vim-script?

personally i don't think it's scary... i don't really have a problem with vimscript either

This is indeed great, the downside however is that on some
distributions, probably not all those languages will be enabled by
default

there's a good chance that NONE of them will be. on linux that's not really a problem, i think most intermediate linux users could easily compile vim with perl (or the others) enabled...

on windows it's much easier to google around till you find vim with the language you want already compiled in...but it's not that difficult to compile in windows either...

vimscript is the only way to be sure that your extensions will run
everywhere.

i wasn't thinking of distributing extensions. i was thinking of the programmer using vim extending the editor him/herself in the language (probably) already being used ie. ruby.

if for some reason i thought my vim extension should be distributed, i'd make the proper vim exe available anyway...

Right, right.... but an experienced emacs user would probably just do
C-5 C-k. Which is for me faster than first switching mode in vim
(Esc), then do the 5dd, then switching back to insert mode (i).

i'm just guessing here, but i think most vim users switch in and out of the various modes less then one would think...

combo commands i tend to use in frequently that require command mode, i've already mapped to something else...

very rarely do i have to hit esc. other vim users' mileage may very...

I use Emacs most of the time, but I regularly use vi(m) for editing
config files.

i was a die hard emacs user until i had to work on other linux boxes...to make my life easier i just bit the bullet and learned vim because i knew some version of it would be on the system... of course once i learned vim i didn't really need emacs anymore. i do have a few emacs like editors installed though (microemacs, jed) just in case i get the urge :slight_smile:

> I think the most important thing is that *you* can work

efficiently with the tools *you* use, whether your editor is Emacs,
Vi(m), a full-blown IDE...

true enough...i was mainly thinking from the newbies point of view when thinking of the choice to use an editor or an ide

20 years ago we had an ide for just about every dos language (turbo pascal, turbo c, quickbasic, etc) you got used to it... which is probably why plugins for various ide's like eclipse, jedit, are popular now...

having said all that, i use komodo for my ruby programming beyond 100 lines or so. if i need to debug beyond 'print statements' i fire up freeride.

···

--
http://home.cogeco.ca/~tsummerfelt1
telnet://ventedspleen.dyndns.org

65

Err, in emacs to delete 5 lines i would type: C-u 5 c-k, which isn't much longer than <Escape>5dd :slight_smile:

it's not the length so much as it's the hand and finger contortions. the example in question isn't that bad, but i've had to do worse... with vim your hands don't have to travel far from the home row... <esc> would of course be typed with ctrl-[

if one is a touch-typist, vim makes you very efficient at editing text...

···

--
http://home.cogeco.ca/~tsummerfelt1
telnet://ventedspleen.dyndns.org

66

Yes! kate has ruby syntax highlighting.

···

On 04/29/2005 03:25 PM, Richard Dale wrote:

Martin DeMello wrote:

vruz <horacio.lopez@gmail.com> wrote:

maybe you mean something like:=20
Sign in · GitLab

or perhaps:
http://www.yzis.org

Sweet! Thanks for the pointers.

As it's a Kate part you can use it in KDevelop as well as Kate. I haven't
tried it though - I don't know if it has ruby syntax highlighting.

--
Dr Balwinder Singh Dheeman Registered Linux User: #229709
CLLO (Chief Linux Learning Officer) Machines: #168573, 170593, 259192
Anu's Linux@HOME Distros: Ubuntu, Fedora, Knoppix
More: http://anu.homelinux.net/~bsd/ Visit: http://counter.li.org/

67

I've been long time user of emacs, but finally switched over to using
vim. That was my major problem with emacs. My wrists really hurt after
I started using my tiny laptop with small keyboard.

Kent.

···

On 4/29/05, Joe Van Dyk <joevandyk@gmail.com> wrote:

On 4/29/05, Ruben <Ruben.Vandeginste@cs.kuleuven.ac.be> wrote:
>
> At Fri, 29 Apr 2005 21:44:54 +0900, tony summerfelt wrote:
> >
> > everytime the vim vs emacs thread comes up i like to make these two
> > points:
> >
> > >> C-X2-C-Xo m-x shell
> >
> > and that's ALL you have to do to get a command line in emacs :slight_smile:
>
> Actually, if you just do M-x eshell, you already have a shell. The
> other commands are just for splitting your window into 2 frames and
> switching focus to the frame where you'll start the shell.
>
> > ok, but this is scarier:
> [snip]
>
> What's so scary about lisp code? Wanna show me some vim-script?
>
> > one advantage is that vim has is that you can extend your editor using
> > the (or all for that matter) scripting language of your choice,
> > vimscript, tcl, perl, ruby, python. to extend emacs you use something
> > like have the lisp code above.
>
> This is indeed great, the downside however is that on some
> distributions, probably not all those languages will be enabled by
> default (allthough i'm not sure about that), so that in the end
> vimscript is the only way to be sure that your extensions will run
> everywhere. There is no such problem with emacs-lisp-code. (unless you
> want it to run on both GNU Emacs and Xemacs)
>
> > another advantage is that if you're a touch-typist, vim is very
> > efficient at editing code. i think it's very handy that to delete 5
> > lines of text you can type: 5dd or do it the long way: Vjjjjjd
> >
> > compared to emacs: C-spacebar, cursor to your target, C-w
> >
> > the first key combo assumes your terminal will support it otherwise
> > you're stuck with: M-x set-mark-command
>
> Right, right.... but an experienced emacs user would probably just do
> C-5 C-k. Which is for me faster than first switching mode in vim
> (Esc), then do the 5dd, then switching back to insert mode (i).
>
> What is the point of this "emacs is better" or "vim is better" ?
>
> I use Emacs most of the time, but I regularly use vi(m) for editing
> config files. I think the most important thing is that *you* can work
> efficiently with the tools *you* use, whether your editor is Emacs,
> Vi(m), a full-blown IDE...
>

I try to keep an open mind about trying new things all the time. But
I tried to use Emacs for two days and my wrists and hands hurt SOOO
bad that I had to go back to vim.

Do you have to bind the ctrl key to the caps lock key in order to use
Emacs over a long period of time?

68

what features do a "properly embedded shell" have that a simple
"screen"-split at console (or simply multiple windows open) do not? I'm
not being sarcastic, i just want to know what i could be missing...

Probably not a lot. Sometimes when I'm coding, I'll have the screen arranged in quarters, and having one of those quarters be a console would be useful. Being able to copy and paste from the console to something that you're working on is nice (I tend to use gpm for this, but using vim's copy-paste buffers would be more consistent). It's nothing serious; I use vim full time, so I obviously don't consider it to be a show-stopper. I'd just be really happy if having a console in vim were possible.

69

Martin DeMello wrote:
>> maybe you mean something like:=20
>> Sign in · GitLab
>>
>> or perhaps:
>> http://www.yzis.org
>
> Sweet! Thanks for the pointers.

As it's a Kate part you can use it in KDevelop as well as Kate. I haven't
tried it though - I don't know if it has ruby syntax highlighting.

It has the same syntax highlighting files as Kate, including one for Ruby.

-- Richard

Stefan

···

On Friday 29 April 2005 12:14, Richard Dale wrote:

> vruz <horacio.lopez@gmail.com> wrote:

70

I try to keep an open mind about trying new things all the time. But
I tried to use Emacs for two days and my wrists and hands hurt SOOO
bad that I had to go back to vim.

I've heard before that some people have this problem...

Do you have to bind the ctrl key to the caps lock key in order to use
Emacs over a long period of time?

No, I never did that. I've read that some people do that, but I never
felt the need for that; I never had any problems with my wrists.
Also, for most shortcuts I'm using the right Ctrl-key instead of the
left one, maybe that helps (since I'm using both hands instead of
one).

Ruben

···

At Sat, 30 Apr 2005 01:35:57 +0900, Joe Van Dyk wrote:

71

Excerpts from Tom Nakamura's mail of 29 Apr 2005 (EDT):

what features do a "properly embedded shell" have that a simple
"screen"-split at console (or simply multiple windows open) do not?
I'm not being sarcastic, i just want to know what i could be
missing...

For languages with an interactive environment (like Ruby (irb) and R), a
good Emacs mode will let you run the environment in a split screen with
the code you're editing, and will make it easy to dump the current
line/selection/function into the environment.

I haven't figured out how to do this with Ruby yet, but with R I just
hit C-c M-f and whatever function the cursor is currently in gets dumped
into the interactive environment and evaluated. Makes debugging easy.

···

--
William <wmorgan-ruby-talk@masanjin.net>

72

if one is a touch-typist, vim makes you very efficient at editing text...

And if all you want to do is edit text, vi(m) is a fine editor.

Emacs big win is that it does so, so much more. It's like debating
your clock vs. your computer because you can tell the current time
with both.

And, I apologize for adding to this way too off topic thread.

73

Dr Balwinder S Dheeman wrote:

···

On 04/29/2005 03:25 PM, Richard Dale wrote:

Martin DeMello wrote:

vruz <horacio.lopez@gmail.com> wrote:

maybe you mean something like:=20
Sign in · GitLab

or perhaps:
http://www.yzis.org

Sweet! Thanks for the pointers.

As it's a Kate part you can use it in KDevelop as well as Kate. I haven't
tried it though - I don't know if it has ruby syntax highlighting.

Yes! kate has ruby syntax highlighting.

Yes, but I meant the kyzis Kate plugin, not the standard Kate KPart.

-- Richard

74

open up a screen session (man screen) and you can have both a console and vim
in alternating screen with cut-and-paste between them. i use it all the time:
one window with vim, one running code/tests, one in console.

something like this will get you going:

   ~ > screen -S my_screen_name # start a screen with a name
   ~ > vim a.rb # open up vim in first window
   ~ > Ctrl-a c # create a new console in this terminal
   ~ > Ctrl-a n # switch back to your vim

do a Ctrl-a ? for help and/or man screen to read about cutting-pasting. this
also has the advatange that you can login to the machine from another host
(when you go home for instance) and re-attach to your screen and you'll be
exactly where you were in your vim session before. this one is tough to do in
an ide!

cheers.

-a

···

On Sat, 30 Apr 2005, tsuraan wrote:

what features do a "properly embedded shell" have that a simple
"screen"-split at console (or simply multiple windows open) do not? I'm
not being sarcastic, i just want to know what i could be missing...

Probably not a lot. Sometimes when I'm coding, I'll have the screen
arranged in quarters, and having one of those quarters be a console
would be useful. Being able to copy and paste from the console to
something that you're working on is nice (I tend to use gpm for this,
but using vim's copy-paste buffers would be more consistent). It's
nothing serious; I use vim full time, so I obviously don't consider it
to be a show-stopper. I'd just be really happy if having a console in
vim were possible.

--

email :: ara [dot] t [dot] howard [at] noaa [dot] gov
phone :: 303.497.6469
renunciation is not getting rid of the things of this world, but accepting
that they pass away. --aitken roshi

===============================================================================

75

William Morgan wrote:

Excerpts from Tom Nakamura's mail of 29 Apr 2005 (EDT):

what features do a "properly embedded shell" have that a simple
"screen"-split at console (or simply multiple windows open) do not?
I'm not being sarcastic, i just want to know what i could be
missing...

For languages with an interactive environment (like Ruby (irb) and R), a
good Emacs mode will let you run the environment in a split screen with
the code you're editing, and will make it easy to dump the current
line/selection/function into the environment.

I haven't figured out how to do this with Ruby yet, but with R I just
hit C-c M-f and whatever function the cursor is currently in gets dumped
into the interactive environment and evaluated. Makes debugging easy.

You can do this using inf-ruby.el

When in ruby mode it adds a command run-ruby which runs irb in a sub window and then allows you to copy code into it.

HTH

···

--
Mark Sparshatt

76

>
> if one is a touch-typist, vim makes you very efficient at editing text...

And if all you want to do is edit text, vi(m) is a fine editor.

Emacs big win is that it does so, so much more. It's like debating
your clock vs. your computer because you can tell the current time

Huh? scripts : vim online Maybe not on a par with
emacs, but pretty impressive, and you can script it with ruby, so it
kicks emacs ass all over the place for that.

I've disliked the whole Wordstar/Ctrl Key paradigm even since I got
trapped in such an editor on a 1200/75 dialup modem connection once
many years ago...scary :slight_smile:

···

On 5/3/05, Michael Campbell <michael.campbell@gmail.com> wrote:

with both.

And, I apologize for adding to this way too off topic thread.

--
Into RFID? www.rfidnewsupdate.com Simple, fast, news.

77

if one is a touch-typist, vim makes you very efficient at editing text...

And if all you want to do is edit text, vi(m) is a fine editor.

all my code is text so yes, i want to edit it efficiently.

it did occurr to me though that people might not know what 'touch-typist' meant.

Emacs big win is that it does so, so much more.

true enough. i don't want my editor checking my email, just editing text shaped like code.

> t's like debating your clock vs. your computer because you can tell
> the current time with both.

most people don't want a computer on their wrist though :slight_smile:

i DO have emacs set up with w3, reading newsgroups, email, gdb, etc...because i COULD :slight_smile: i just don't use it that often

···

--
http://home.cogeco.ca/~tsummerfelt1
telnet://ventedspleen.dyndns.org

78

Excerpts from Ara.T.Howard@noaa.gov's mail of 29 Apr 2005 (EDT):

this also has the advatange that you can login to the machine from
another host (when you go home for instance) and re-attach to your
screen and you'll be exactly where you were in your vim session
before. this one is tough to do in an ide!

Well now. This is about the most useful thing I've seen all year.
Thanks, Ara!

···

--
William <wmorgan-ruby-talk@masanjin.net>

79

no problem - my sysad actually showed it to me. i don't know how i ever lived
without it!

cheers.

-a

···

On Tue, 3 May 2005, William Morgan wrote:

Excerpts from Ara.T.Howard@noaa.gov's mail of 29 Apr 2005 (EDT):

this also has the advatange that you can login to the machine from another
host (when you go home for instance) and re-attach to your screen and
you'll be exactly where you were in your vim session before. this one is
tough to do in an ide!

Well now. This is about the most useful thing I've seen all year. Thanks,
Ara!

--

email :: ara [dot] t [dot] howard [at] noaa [dot] gov
phone :: 303.497.6469
renunciation is not getting rid of the things of this world, but accepting
that they pass away. --aitken roshi

===============================================================================