# Ruby IDE **URL:** \ **Category:** ruby-talk\ **Created:** [25 April 2006 22:47 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/ruby-ide/26939 "2006-04-25T22:47:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![SleepJunk13](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7ab992/32.png) [@SleepJunk13](https://rubytalk.org/u/SleepJunk13)\ **Post date:** [25 April 2006 22:47 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/ruby-ide/26939/1 "2006-04-25T22:47:56Z")
Is there a standard IDE out there that most people use? I'm looking at Mondrian and Arachno now, but I'm not sure which. I'm also looking at FreeRIDE as well, but I don't know. Thanks a lot, Matt > **···** > > -- > Posted via [http://www.ruby-forum.com/](http://www.ruby-forum.com/). ---
**Author:** ![Ashley\_Moran](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/b5ac83/32.png) [@Ashley\_Moran](https://rubytalk.org/u/Ashley_Moran)\ **Post date:** [25 April 2006 22:52 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/ruby-ide/26939/2 "2006-04-25T22:52:54Z")
Try [www.radrails.org](http://www.radrails.org) Or you could buy an iMac and TextMate 🙂 Ashley > **···** > > On Apr 25, 2006, at 11:47 pm, SleepJunk13 wrote: > > > Is there a standard IDE out there that most people use? I'm looking at > > Mondrian and Arachno now, but I'm not sure which. I'm also looking at > > FreeRIDE as well, but I don't know. ---
**Author:** ![Curt\_Work\_Hibbs1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Curt\_Work\_Hibbs1](https://rubytalk.org/u/Curt_Work_Hibbs1)\ **Post date:** [25 April 2006 22:53 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/ruby-ide/26939/3 "2006-04-25T22:53:47Z")
based on Eclipse \*and\* the RDT plugin). Finally, there is ActiveState's Komodo IDE. Curt > **···** > > On 4/25/06, SleepJunk13 \ wrote: > > > Is there a standard IDE out there that most people use? I'm looking at > > Mondrian and Arachno now, but I'm not sure which. I'm also looking at > > FreeRIDE as well, but I don't know. > > > > Thanks a lot, > > > > Matt > > > > -- > > Posted via [http://www.ruby-forum.com/\](http://www.ruby-forum.com/%5C). > > > > There is also the RDT plugin for Eclipse, and RadRails (which is also ---
**Author:** ![SleepJunk13](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7ab992/32.png) [@SleepJunk13](https://rubytalk.org/u/SleepJunk13)\ **Post date:** [25 April 2006 22:55 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/ruby-ide/26939/4 "2006-04-25T22:55:53Z")
> > Try [www.radrails.org](http://www.radrails.org) Or you could buy an iMac and TextMate :)\<\< I know of RadRails. I use it to work on my Rails apps, but it's testing and debugging isn't great. I don't need rails support in what I'm doing. Just a nice ruby editor. Thanks, though 🙂 > **···** > > -- > Posted via [http://www.ruby-forum.com/\](http://www.ruby-forum.com/%5C). ---
**Author:** ![Werner\_Bohl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/7993a0/32.png) [@Werner\_Bohl](https://rubytalk.org/u/Werner_Bohl)\ **Post date:** [26 April 2006 01:07 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/ruby-ide/26939/5 "2006-04-26T01:07:28Z")
When discussing Ruby IDEs, nobody has ever mentioned KDE Develop or Quanta. Latested versions of these have good ruby support. Werner SleepJunk13 wrote: > **···** > > > Is there a standard IDE out there that most people use? I'm looking at > > Mondrian and Arachno now, but I'm not sure which. I'm also looking at > > FreeRIDE as well, but I don't know. > > > > Thanks a lot, > > > > Matt > > -- > Posted via [http://www.ruby-forum.com/\](http://www.ruby-forum.com/%5C). ---
**Author:** ![Jonas\_Hartmann](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/76d3ee/32.png) [@Jonas\_Hartmann](https://rubytalk.org/u/Jonas_Hartmann)\ **Post date:** [26 April 2006 09:15 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/ruby-ide/26939/6 "2006-04-26T09:15:35Z")
SleepJunk13 wrote: > Is there a standard IDE out there that most people use? I'm looking at Mondrian and Arachno now, but I'm not sure which. I'm also looking at FreeRIDE as well, but I don't know. > > Thanks a lot, > > Matt Try jEdit with Ruby [http://jedit.org/](http://jedit.org/) [http://rubyjedit.org/](http://rubyjedit.org/) ---
**Author:** ![Paul\_Legato1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3ab097/32.png) [@Paul\_Legato1](https://rubytalk.org/u/Paul_Legato1)\ **Post date:** [29 April 2006 17:57 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/ruby-ide/26939/7 "2006-04-29T17:57:41Z")
SleepJunk13 wrote: > Is there a standard IDE out there that most people use? I'm looking at Mondrian and Arachno now, but I'm not sure which. I'm also looking at FreeRIDE as well, but I don't know. Well, there's no right answer to this. Everyone has a different coding style, workflow style, and personality, so everyone fits best with a different editor. The two standard editors amongst professional Unix programmers are Emacs and vi. There has been something of an ongoing tongue in cheek holy war between their adherents for twenty-some years now. (See [Editor war - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Editor_war) , which also lists some advantages of each.) Both are open source, completely free (both libre and gratis) and now also available as precompiled binaries for Windows, Mac, and most other platforms. I (and many other people) swear by Emacs. There are two main forks, XEmacs ([http://www.xemacs.org/\](http://www.xemacs.org/%5C)) and GNU Emacs ([http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/\](http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/%5C)). Emacs is \_extremely\_ powerful - it is actually a LISP interpreter with a whole lot of predefined LISP code to make it work as a text editor. There are file browsers, editing modes with syntax highlighting, autoindent, autocomplete, etc. for most programming languages, including Ruby, and there are optional Emacs LISP addons available for just about anything a computer can do. (Really. Almost everything. Web browsers, mail readers, http servers, Tetris, AI chat programs....) The flipside is that the learning curve is not particularly shallow, but there are good tutorials and lots and lots of documentation available. I do have friends who are just as passionate and productive with vi, though (and they love to point out that vi doesn't immediately take up 35 megs of memory when you start it.) I have tried various other commercial, shareware, and free IDEs and editors over the years, and I have never found any feature that they have that Emacs doesn't do. On the other hand, I always find lots of things that Emacs can do that they don't do. I always keep coming back to Emacs 🙂 If you're serious about programming, I recommend you take some time to try them all. Try Emacs for a few days, try vi or vim for a few days, try the demos of the commercial editors, try Eclipse FreeRIDE and the other free IDEs... It's really a matter of personal choice and taste more than anything else, and trying a bunch of editors yourself is the only way to figure out which one suits you best. Best, Paul > **···** > > -- > > -------------------------------------------------- > -- Paul Legato, Senior Software Engineer -- > --- Networked Knowledge Systems --- > ---- P.O. Box 20772 Tampa, FL. 33622-0772 ---- > ----- (813)594-0064 Voice (813)594-0045 FAX ----- > ------ plegato@nks.net ------ > -------------------------------------------------- > > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- This email bound by the following: ----- > ---- [http://www.nks.net/email\_disclaimer.html](http://www.nks.net/email_disclaimer.html) ---- > -------------------------------------------------- ---
**Author:** ![Ryan\_Leavengood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/a587f6/32.png) [@Ryan\_Leavengood](https://rubytalk.org/u/Ryan_Leavengood)\ **Post date:** [25 April 2006 23:07 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/ruby-ide/26939/8 "2006-04-25T23:07:53Z")
Myself and a lot of other people swear by VIM (www.vim.org) for Ruby editing and for most other editing. It can take a while to learn, but once you do it is extremely powerful. It is also available on just about every OS you can imagine. Today at work I did Java coding on Windows using VIM, then just now I did some Ruby coding on Windows at home, and later I'll be coding C++ on BeOS using VIM. I started using it on Linux. Plus once you know VIM you'll be able to use the standard vi installed on most Unixes (though you'll miss all the nice VIM features.) Regards, Ryan > **···** > > On 4/25/06, SleepJunk13 \ wrote: > > > I know of RadRails. I use it to work on my Rails apps, but it's testing > > and debugging isn't great. I don't need rails support in what I'm doing. > > Just a nice ruby editor. ---
**Author:** ![HAL\_9000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/90ced4/32.png) [@HAL\_9000](https://rubytalk.org/u/HAL_9000)\ **Post date:** [26 April 2006 01:22 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/ruby-ide/26939/9 "2006-04-26T01:22:39Z")
Werner Bohl wrote: > When discussing Ruby IDEs, nobody has ever mentioned KDE Develop or Quanta. > Latested versions of these have good ruby support. I don't know what Quanta is. I thought KDE Develop was just a GUI designer, is that not true? Hal ---
**Author:** ![SleepJunk13](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7ab992/32.png) [@SleepJunk13](https://rubytalk.org/u/SleepJunk13)\ **Post date:** [26 April 2006 12:11 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/ruby-ide/26939/10 "2006-04-26T12:11:06Z")
Jonas Hartmann wrote: > SleepJunk13 wrote: > > > Is there a standard IDE out there that most people use? I'm looking at > > Mondrian and Arachno now, but I'm not sure which. I'm also looking at > > FreeRIDE as well, but I don't know. > > > > Thanks a lot, > > > > Matt > > Try jEdit with Ruby > > [http://jedit.org/](http://jedit.org/) > [http://rubyjedit.org/](http://rubyjedit.org/) I'll take a look at jEdit later when I get home. I started using a trial of Komodo last night and I like that. Have you seen any problems with it? > **···** > > -- > Posted via [http://www.ruby-forum.com/\](http://www.ruby-forum.com/%5C). ---
**Author:** ![Eric\_Armstrong](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/46a35a/32.png) [@Eric\_Armstrong](https://rubytalk.org/u/Eric_Armstrong)\ **Post date:** [30 April 2006 00:29 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/ruby-ide/26939/11 "2006-04-30T00:29:50Z")
Hmm. The only thing that turned me off to Emacs was the weird command names--and probably the lisp-ness, had I gotten close enough to it to get into that. Which gets me thinking... Ruby is Lisp-like...Emacs is based on Lisp... There really ought to be an editor based on Ruby... ...it could start with new user interface semantics     that adhere to the standards that have evolved     over the last 35 years ...that would make it easy to use right from the start ...it could use Ruby, and be extended with Ruby, so     it could be customized and evolved using the     rather terrific language that Ruby is So much to code, so little time... :\_) Paul Legato wrote: > **···** > > > SleepJunk13 wrote: > > > > > Is there a standard IDE out there that most people use? I'm looking at Mondrian and Arachno now, but I'm not sure which. I'm also looking at FreeRIDE as well, but I don't know. > > > > Well, there's no right answer to this. Everyone has a different coding style, workflow style, and personality, so everyone fits best with a different editor. > > > > The two standard editors amongst professional Unix programmers are Emacs and vi. There has been something of an ongoing tongue in cheek holy war between their adherents for twenty-some years now. (See [Editor war - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Editor_war) , which also lists some advantages of each.) Both are open source, completely free (both libre and gratis) and now also available as precompiled binaries for Windows, Mac, and most other platforms. > > > > I (and many other people) swear by Emacs. There are two main forks, XEmacs ([http://www.xemacs.org/\](http://www.xemacs.org/%5C)) and GNU Emacs ([http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/\](http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/%5C)). Emacs is \_extremely\_ powerful - it is actually a LISP interpreter with a whole lot of predefined LISP code to make it work as a text editor. There are file browsers, editing modes with syntax highlighting, autoindent, autocomplete, etc. for most programming languages, including Ruby, and there are optional Emacs LISP addons available for just about anything a computer can do. (Really. Almost everything. Web browsers, mail readers, http servers, Tetris, AI chat programs....) The flipside is that the learning curve is not particularly shallow, but there are good tutorials and lots and lots of documentation available. I do have friends who are just as passionate and productive with vi, though (and they love to point out that vi doesn't immediately take up 35 megs of memory when you start it.) > > > > I have tried various other commercial, shareware, and free IDEs and editors over the years, and I have never found any feature that they have that Emacs doesn't do. On the other hand, I always find lots of things that Emacs can do that they don't do. I always keep coming back to Emacs 🙂 > > > > If you're serious about programming, I recommend you take some time to try them all. Try Emacs for a few days, try vi or vim for a few days, try the demos of the commercial editors, try Eclipse FreeRIDE and the other free IDEs... It's really a matter of personal choice and taste more than anything else, and trying a bunch of editors yourself is the only way to figure out which one suits you best. > > > > Best, > > Paul ---
**Author:** ![Mike\_Nelson](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/dbc845/32.png) [@Mike\_Nelson](https://rubytalk.org/u/Mike_Nelson)\ **Post date:** [26 April 2006 00:27 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/ruby-ide/26939/12 "2006-04-26T00:27:34Z")
Ryan Leavengood wrote: > Myself and a lot of other people swear by VIM (www.vim.org) for Ruby > editing and for most other editing. It can take a while to learn, but > once you do it is extremely powerful. I agree vim is very nice. A bit of a ramp up to learn the basics but well worth it. Btw, are there any cool auto-completion scripts out there for Ruby? > **···** > > -- > Posted via [http://www.ruby-forum.com/\](http://www.ruby-forum.com/%5C). ---
**Author:** ![John\_Gabriele](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/73ab20/32.png) [@John\_Gabriele](https://rubytalk.org/u/John_Gabriele)\ **Post date:** [26 April 2006 01:20 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/ruby-ide/26939/13 "2006-04-26T01:20:24Z")
> \> > \> I know of RadRails. I use it to work on my Rails apps, but it's testing > \> and debugging isn't great. I don't need rails support in what I'm doing. > \> Just a nice ruby editor. > > Myself and a lot of other people swear by VIM (www.vim.org) for Ruby > editing and for most other editing. It can take a while to learn, but > once you do it is extremely powerful. It is also available on just > about every OS you can imagine. Today at work I did Java coding on > Windows using VIM, then just now I did some Ruby coding on Windows at > home, and later I'll be coding C++ on BeOS using VIM. I started using > it on Linux. I've been using vim for light stuff for a while now, but it seems inconsistent to me, and has been difficult to get used to. That is, commands can take a number of different forms: :set foo :foo on nfoo :%foo Plus there's some commands you hit while in command mode, but then others with ctrl characters while in insert mode (like Ctrl-d). Wait though -- there's also some ctrl chars while in command mode too. Besides that, in general I find myself slowed down constantly hitting Ctrl-[, forgetting whether I'm in command mode or not. Either that, or I'm filling my files with ":w" or "\>\>" or "i", "b", "w"... Regarding FreeRIDE, I think development on it has slowed lately because they're working on getting wxRuby together. I believe that future versions of FreeRIDE will probably use wxWidgets instead of FOX. > Plus once you know VIM you'll be able to use the standard vi installed > on most Unixes (though you'll miss all the nice VIM features.) What tends to keep me coming back is vim's smart syntax highlighting. It guesses how to syntax highlight different system config files very well. That said, on the desktop, so far, I've found NEdit to be most useful. > **···** > > On 4/25/06, Ryan Leavengood \ wrote: > > > On 4/25/06, SleepJunk13 \ wrote: ---
**Author:** ![John\_Gabriele](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/73ab20/32.png) [@John\_Gabriele](https://rubytalk.org/u/John_Gabriele)\ **Post date:** [30 April 2006 00:41 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/ruby-ide/26939/14 "2006-04-30T00:41:54Z")
[fixed top-posting] > Paul Legato wrote: > \> SleepJunk13 wrote: > \> \> Is there a standard IDE out there that most people use? I'm looking at > \> \> Mondrian and Arachno now, but I'm not sure which. I'm also looking at > \> \> FreeRIDE as well, but I don't know. > \> > \> [snip] > \> > \> If you're serious about programming, I recommend you take some time to > \> try them all. Try Emacs for a few days, try vi or vim for a few days, > \> try the demos of the commercial editors, try Eclipse FreeRIDE and the > \> other free IDEs... It's really a matter of personal choice and taste > \> more than anything else, and trying a bunch of editors yourself is the > \> only way to figure out which one suits you best. > \> > \> Best, > \> Paul > > Hmm. The only thing that turned me off to Emacs was the > weird command names--and probably the lisp-ness, had I > gotten close enough to it to get into that. > > Which gets me thinking... > > Ruby is Lisp-like...Emacs is based on Lisp... > There really ought to be an editor based on Ruby... I believe FreeRIDE is written in Ruby, as are the plug-ins you might write for it. > ...it could start with new user interface semantics >     that adhere to the standards that have evolved >     over the last 35 years > > ...that would make it easy to use right from the start > > ...it could use Ruby, and be extended with Ruby, so >     it could be customized and evolved using the >     rather terrific language that Ruby is > > So much to code, so little time... > :\_) Again -- I think more good things should be happening with FreeRIDE in the near future, especially after the wxRuby rewrite is done (and there's been good progress on that front lately). > **···** > > On 4/29/06, Eric Armstrong \ wrote: ---
**Author:** ![Pistos\_Christou1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/977dab/32.png) [@Pistos\_Christou1](https://rubytalk.org/u/Pistos_Christou1)\ **Post date:** [4 May 2006 03:26 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/ruby-ide/26939/15 "2006-05-04T03:26:36Z")
Eric Armstrong wrote: > Ruby is Lisp-like...Emacs is based on Lisp... > There really ought to be an editor based on Ruby... > > ...it could start with new user interface semantics >     that adhere to the standards that have evolved >     over the last 35 years > > ...that would make it easy to use right from the start > > ...it could use Ruby, and be extended with Ruby, so >     it could be customized and evolved using the >     rather terrific language that Ruby is Hm. There \_are\_ editors that can be scripted and extended in Ruby. As someone else mentioned, FreeRIDE. But I hear/see that vi(m) can also be driven by Ruby. Diakonos is still young and fledgling, but it is almost fully scriptable in Ruby; that is, if you can press a key to do a certain function, then you can also call that function in a Ruby script. Pistos > **···** > > -- > Posted via [http://www.ruby-forum.com/\](http://www.ruby-forum.com/%5C). ---
**Author:** ![Michael\_Fellinger1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e47774/32.png) [@Michael\_Fellinger1](https://rubytalk.org/u/Michael_Fellinger1)\ **Post date:** [26 April 2006 01:54 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/ruby-ide/26939/16 "2006-04-26T01:54:49Z")
Yes there are, but only for VIM7 afaik, which is available for most platforms as well. [http://blog.hasno.info/blog/segfault/dev/2006/04/10/vim-7-ruby-omni-completion.html](http://blog.hasno.info/blog/segfault/dev/2006/04/10/vim-7-ruby-omni-completion.html) I've also made a small collection of neat scripts/styles and bundled them for my own use. [http://www.manveru.net/stuff/best\_of\_ruby\_for\_vim.tar.gz](http://www.manveru.net/stuff/best_of_ruby_for_vim.tar.gz) This provides you for example with a nice :Ri command, auto-insertion of ends and closes closures like '' "" () {} ||. There are still some little bugs in there that might need a fix, but so far i'm pretty satisfied 🙂 also, to auto-indent a whole file type gg=G btw, a page that helped me a lot is [JMC – Loans and lending guide.](http://jmcpherson.org/editing.html) - he covers most of the useful commands also be sure to check out vimtutor, which should be installed when you install vim automatically. Hope that helps 🙂 > **···** > > On Wednesday 26 April 2006 09:27, Mike Nelson wrote: > > > Ryan Leavengood wrote: > > \> Myself and a lot of other people swear by VIM (www.vim.org) for Ruby > > \> editing and for most other editing. It can take a while to learn, but > > \> once you do it is extremely powerful. > > > > I agree vim is very nice. A bit of a ramp up to learn the basics but > > well worth it. > > > > Btw, are there any cool auto-completion scripts out there for Ruby? > > -- > toeprint n. > A footprint of especially small size. ---
**Author:** ![Logan\_Capaldo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ea924/32.png) [@Logan\_Capaldo](https://rubytalk.org/u/Logan_Capaldo)\ **Post date:** [26 April 2006 02:16 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/ruby-ide/26939/17 "2006-04-26T02:16:10Z")
> > > I know of RadRails. I use it to work on my Rails apps, but it's testing > > > and debugging isn't great. I don't need rails support in what I'm doing. > > > Just a nice ruby editor. > > > > Myself and a lot of other people swear by VIM (www.vim.org) for Ruby > > editing and for most other editing. It can take a while to learn, but > > once you do it is extremely powerful. It is also available on just > > about every OS you can imagine. Today at work I did Java coding on > > Windows using VIM, then just now I did some Ruby coding on Windows at > > home, and later I'll be coding C++ on BeOS using VIM. I started using > > it on Linux. > > I've been using vim for light stuff for a while now, but it seems > inconsistent to me, and has been difficult to get used to. That is, > commands can take a number of different forms: > > :set foo > :foo on > nfoo > :%foo > > Plus there's some commands you hit while in command mode, but then > others with ctrl characters while in insert mode (like Ctrl-d). Wait > though -- there's also some ctrl chars while in command mode too. Can't argue with that > Besides that, in general I find myself slowed down constantly hitting > Ctrl-[, forgetting whether I'm in command mode or not. Either that, or > I'm filling my files with ":w" or "\>\>" or "i", "b", "w"... You're in command mode unless the bottom says --INSERT-- or --VISUAL-- I find ESC to be much faster than Ctrl-[, YMMV. > **···** > > On Apr 25, 2006, at 9:20 PM, John Gabriele wrote: > > > On 4/25/06, Ryan Leavengood \ wrote: > > > > > On 4/25/06, SleepJunk13 \ wrote: > > > Regarding FreeRIDE, I think development on it has slowed lately > > because they're working on getting wxRuby together. I believe that > > future versions of FreeRIDE will probably use wxWidgets instead of > > FOX. > > > > > Plus once you know VIM you'll be able to use the standard vi installed > > > on most Unixes (though you'll miss all the nice VIM features.) > > > > What tends to keep me coming back is vim's smart syntax highlighting. > > It guesses how to syntax highlight different system config files very > > well. > > > > That said, on the desktop, so far, I've found NEdit to be most useful. ---
**Author:** ![Alexandru\_E\_Ungur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c0e974/32.png) [@Alexandru\_E\_Ungur](https://rubytalk.org/u/Alexandru_E_Ungur)\ **Post date:** [26 April 2006 06:43 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/ruby-ide/26939/18 "2006-04-26T06:43:57Z")
> > > sender: "John Gabriele" date: "Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 10:20:24AM +0900" \<\<\ > \> \> > \> \> I know of RadRails. I use it to work on my Rails apps, but it's testing > \> \> and debugging isn't great. I don't need rails support in what I'm doing. > \> \> Just a nice ruby editor. > \> > \> Myself and a lot of other people swear by VIM (www.vim.org) for Ruby > \> editing and for most other editing. It can take a while to learn, but > \> once you do it is extremely powerful. It is also available on just > \> about every OS you can imagine. Today at work I did Java coding on > \> Windows using VIM, then just now I did some Ruby coding on Windows at > \> home, and later I'll be coding C++ on BeOS using VIM. I started using > \> it on Linux. > > I've been using vim for light stuff for a while now, but it seems > inconsistent to me, and has been difficult to get used to. That is, > commands can take a number of different forms: > > :set foo > :foo on > nfoo > :%foo \ You can say what you want OR what you want, you can say but HEY that won't stop you to say what you really want is it? 😛 I mean, did you ever stop talking in English (or any other language for that matter) just because there's more than just one way/more ways/many ways/not just one way (oh dear God, I'm confusing myself... this English language is so hard, just like Vim... so many options...) to express things... ? I don't think so... \ > Plus there's some commands you hit while in command mode, but then > others with ctrl characters while in insert mode (like Ctrl-d). Wait > though -- there's also some ctrl chars while in command mode too. > > Besides that, in general I find myself slowed down constantly hitting > Ctrl-[, forgetting whether I'm in command mode or not. Either that, or > I'm filling my files with ":w" or "\>\>" or "i", "b", "w"... Being a 3 months Vim newbie, I had that problem too not too long ago (at least in the first 2-3 days anyway...) so after digging around a little I came up with a rather nice solution to it: I use the entire statusbar's background color to tell me where I am: RED background == edit mode, GREEN background == normal mode. Works like a charm 😉 You better try the Ruby autocompletion as well: [http://blog.hasno.info/blog/segfault/dev/2006/04/10/vim-7-ruby-omni-completion.html](http://blog.hasno.info/blog/segfault/dev/2006/04/10/vim-7-ruby-omni-completion.html) If you like syntax highlight, you'll love that 😉 All the best, Alex > **···** > > > On 4/25/06, Ryan Leavengood \ wrote: > > \> On 4/25/06, SleepJunk13 \ wrote: ---
**Author:** ![Jeff\_Rose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f4b2a3/32.png) [@Jeff\_Rose](https://rubytalk.org/u/Jeff_Rose)\ **Post date:** [26 April 2006 08:33 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/ruby-ide/26939/19 "2006-04-26T08:33:43Z")
John Gabriele wrote: > > > I know of RadRails. I use it to work on my Rails apps, but it's testing > > > and debugging isn't great. I don't need rails support in what I'm doing. > > > Just a nice ruby editor. > > > > Myself and a lot of other people swear by VIM (www.vim.org) for Ruby > > editing and for most other editing. It can take a while to learn, but > > once you do it is extremely powerful. It is also available on just > > about every OS you can imagine. Today at work I did Java coding on > > Windows using VIM, then just now I did some Ruby coding on Windows at > > home, and later I'll be coding C++ on BeOS using VIM. I started using > > it on Linux. > > I've been using vim for light stuff for a while now, but it seems > inconsistent to me, and has been difficult to get used to. That is, > commands can take a number of different forms: > > :set foo > :foo on > nfoo > :%foo > > Plus there's some commands you hit while in command mode, but then > others with ctrl characters while in insert mode (like Ctrl-d). Wait > though -- there's also some ctrl chars while in command mode too. > > Besides that, in general I find myself slowed down constantly hitting > Ctrl-[, forgetting whether I'm in command mode or not. Either that, or > I'm filling my files with ":w" or "\>\>" or "i", "b", "w"... I guess there might be a few inconsistencies, but what drew me to vim was pretty much the opposite feeling. Most editors have seemingly random key bindings for running commands, and although they stay the same because you are always in one mode, they are rarely as powerful as vim. For example, the whole concept of filtering ranges of text through commands is really genius. It mixes in perfectly with the unix mentality, and it lets you compose your own commands from a simple set of primitives. Sure, it might take a little practice to get the commands down, but then you can mix and match to create virtually infinite numbers of combinations. That's just not possible or at least not natural in other editors, and I used emacs for about 5 years before my conversion... Beyond that, you can program it in ruby! On that note, I have been working on a ruby plugin, SnippetMagic, for vim that provides snippets functionality ala TextMate. It's not method completion, but it's a sort of programmable macro system. You can read descriptions and download it here: [http://blog.rosejn.net/articles/2006/02/28/snippetmagic-0-02](http://blog.rosejn.net/articles/2006/02/28/snippetmagic-0-02) -Jeff > **···** > > > On 4/25/06, Ryan Leavengood \ wrote: > > > > > On 4/25/06, SleepJunk13 \ wrote: ---
**Author:** ![Tsuraan1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/d07c76/32.png) [@Tsuraan1](https://rubytalk.org/u/Tsuraan1)\ **Post date:** [26 April 2006 14:56 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/ruby-ide/26939/20 "2006-04-26T14:56:15Z")
> Besides that, in general I find myself slowed down constantly hitting > Ctrl-[, forgetting whether I'm in command mode or not. Either that, or > I'm filling my files with ":w" or "\>\>" or "i", "b", "w"... The Ctrl-[ thing is interesting to me, because I've never heard of anyone else escaping that way. Out of curiosity, is your control key in the corner of your keyboard, or next to the 'a' key? For me, with my control key right by my 'a' key, hitting ctrl-[ is really quick and easy. The escape key is just too far off the home row for me to bother with 🙂 [Next page](https://rubytalk.org/t/ruby-ide/26939.md?page=2)