Ah, found the Java developer.

(04-06-2016, 06:40 PM)jaagr Wrote: I do almost all my coding in Vim, thanks to Eclim (the headless server neeasade just mentioned (over half a year ago apparently).

<b>It is a must if you are working in Vim with large projects, at least if you want to focus on writing good code.</b>

Maybe you need a large set of tools to baby you along in your programming, but most people get by with vanilla Vim. Of course, Java is a bloated language, so it's probably normal to use a bloated editor.

(04-06-2016, 06:40 PM)jaagr Wrote: Enough on how to easily solve that editor issue.

YMMV, editor wars will never be "easily solved."

(04-06-2016, 06:40 PM)jaagr Wrote: And why was Eclipse even a problem?

Did anyone ever say Eclipse was a problem? Z3bra posted this to "show how you can avoid [using eclipse], in favor of your daily tools." He even prefaces that saying "I am not saying that IDEs are evil!"

This is nixers, we are hackers, we enjoy <b>doing things because we fucking can.</b>

(04-06-2016, 06:40 PM)jaagr Wrote: Is it the GUI part you don't like because "that's not what they used to build X" then get your head out of your ass <a href="http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2008-03/msg02254.html">http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2008-03/msg02254.html</a>.

Okay, so you're quoting a mentally ill person who thinks the Eclipse GUI has "neat features?"

(04-06-2016, 06:40 PM)jaagr Wrote: The problem is that some arrogant idiot (the attitude is pretty obvious while reading) who doesn't know Java, doesn't know the JVM and who thinks that the available tooling is bloat... and that using your daily (undefined set of) tools is better.

Who are you to say that z3bra using his daily tools isn't better <b>for him</b>? Z3bra says, "I just finished a java project for my CS studies, on a bare notebook (without X.org). And I had NO PROBLEM with not using Eclipse at all!" He isn't advocating everybody do this, he's experimenting and sharing his experience. As a hacker, that's exciting, he's going outside the box. If you're so offended by people going outside the box, <b>you don't belong here</b>.

(04-06-2016, 06:40 PM)jaagr Wrote: If you want to teach them how to use make, manually write build specs and grabbing dependencies - just show them the way to the local museum because I'm sure they'll have time for an interactive workshop.

Just because makefiles don't align with your questionable philosophies, the fact is: makefiles aren't going anywhere. Check github, virtually every open source project has makefiles. Regardless of whether or not writing things manually is smart, knowing how they work is important and will come in handy.

(04-06-2016, 06:40 PM)jaagr Wrote: So stop being a reactionary dick and start using what's suitable for the task, if what you intend to do is development. Is the goal a good application or 412 LOC?

Maybe the goal is to <b>not have to change his entire fucking programming workflow just to program in Java</b>. That sounds like an admirable goal to me, and it's why I enjoyed reading his article.

(04-06-2016, 06:40 PM)jaagr Wrote: "But X is using only make with 2000 lines of code" - ask the build team if they finally enjoy reading through logs 8 hours aday.

I'm sure you have plenty of experience with logs if you mainly write Java and Scala.

(04-06-2016, 06:40 PM)jaagr Wrote: Yes, your shitty project with 3 source files works great without a generator and is really "leightweight, fast and posix-compliant". No one forces you to use anything else but stop teaching others on how to build X better because trust me that you are doing more harm then good.

It's a blog post dude, not a book. Again, he says, "<b>I am not saying that IDEs are evil! I am just showing how you can avoid them, in favor of your daily tools.</b> I just finished a java project for my CS studies, on a bare notebook (without X.org). And I had NO PROBLEM with not using Eclipse at all! Now let me introduce my setup. Of course, it's not as easy as double-clicking on the eclipse-setup.exe. but it follows <b>my</b> ideas, and <b>I'm happy with it!</b>"

(04-06-2016, 06:40 PM)jaagr Wrote: I don't want my future pacemaker have (knock on wood) have a builtin update module checking for patches because people are taught that it's easy to write C.

Maybe your future pacemaker should have it's builtin update module written in Java... oh wait...

No one says writing C is easy, but C isn't going anywhere, people have to learn.

(04-06-2016, 06:40 PM)jaagr Wrote: So get your mindset fixed, be responsible and <b>DON'T tell them not to use A because it's not fast or lightweight enough... for the desktop email indicator they are planning to write.</b>

This thinking is cancerous. Desktop email indicators should most definitely be fast and lightweight.

(04-06-2016, 06:40 PM)jaagr Wrote: "It gets so slow if you don't do it the hardcore way!!!1"
I hear this alot but I never see any valid tests being done. Fascinating.

Write a desktop indicator in Java, mine written in C will be faster and I guarantee it will be a fraction of the size. Is that a valid enough test for you?

(04-06-2016, 06:40 PM)jaagr Wrote: There's some cool ppl on here, but I think I'm going back to the 21st century where people are pushing software development in the <b>right direction</b>.

Hackers like z3bra are pushing software development in the right direction. Experimenting, documenting, tweaking, ricing, it's all part of the process. If you don't agree with that you definitely don't belong here.