Development without IDE

Tomas Penc

unread,

Sep 30, 2003, 10:47:01 AM9/30/03

to

Hi All!

What do you guys think about developing in Java without any IDE, only
using good programmer's editor like UEdit and JDK (and make of course)?

Tomas

Michael Amling

unread,

Sep 30, 2003, 11:56:12 AM9/30/03

to

Works for me. But I write only faceless applications.

--Mike Amling

Dag Sunde

unread,

Sep 30, 2003, 11:58:26 AM9/30/03

to

"Tomas Penc" <re...@to.newsgroup.please> wrote in message
news:blc51u$2i76$1...@ns.felk.cvut.cz...

> Hi All!
>
> What do you guys think about developing in Java without any IDE, only
> using good programmer's editor like UEdit and JDK (and make of course)?
>

A lot of machosistic programmers *do* that, using EMacs in "Java-mode",
and of course not "Make", but "Ant".

Bent C Dalager

unread,

Sep 30, 2003, 12:55:15 PM9/30/03

to

In article <blc51u$2i76$1...@ns.felk.cvut.cz>,

I have found that Emacs works like a charm once I plug in
xrefactory. It allowed me to toss out NetBeans and start actually
being productive. I added Ant for building and JSwat for debugging. I
haven't tried JDEE yet.

It does require you to know your way around your layout classes
though, if you're doing GUI apps.

Cheers
Bent D
--
Bent Dalager - b...@pvv.org - http://www.pvv.org/~bcd
powered by emacs

Graham Crawford

unread,

Sep 30, 2003, 5:39:42 PM9/30/03

to

Hi,

Tomas Penc wrote:
> What do you guys think about developing in Java without any IDE, only
> using good programmer's editor like UEdit and JDK (and make of course)?

I use cscope (yes it works with Java) and vi(m) !

---
Graham

http://www.ozibug.com - quality web based bug tracking

Robert Klemme

unread,

Oct 1, 2003, 3:27:59 AM10/1/03

to

"Tomas Penc" <re...@to.newsgroup.please> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:blc51u$2i76$1...@ns.felk.cvut.cz...

> Hi All!
>
> What do you guys think about developing in Java without any IDE, only
> using good programmer's editor like UEdit and JDK (and make of course)?

I wouldn't want to miss eclipse. A lot of things are most easily done,
including version control and documentation lookup. You don't get that
with an editor though you will be able to use cvs via ant. But with ant
you don't have fine granular control over possible conflicts etc.

robert

nielinjie

unread,

Oct 1, 2003, 8:48:24 AM10/1/03

to

i can program without ide, but why. there is a free and powerful
ide --Eclipse

"Tomas Penc" <re...@to.newsgroup.please>
??????:blc51u$2i76$1...@ns.felk.cvut.cz...

Tomas Penc

unread,

Oct 2, 2003, 8:30:56 AM10/2/03

to

Thanks very much for all your opinions.

Tomas

ian maclure

unread,

Oct 2, 2003, 5:45:48 PM10/2/03

to

In article <3F79F81E...@tortuga.com.au>, "Graham Crawford"
<gra...@tortuga.com.au> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Tomas Penc wrote:
>> What do you guys think about developing in Java without any IDE, only
>> using good programmer's editor like UEdit and JDK (and make of course)?
>
> I use cscope (yes it works with Java) and vi(m) !

I'm using JBuilder9 PE as an editor ( when I don't use vi&variants )
Otherwise its CLI.= since I can't seem to convince JB that Log4J
is available to it.

IBM

_______________________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>

John C. Bollinger

unread,

Sep 30, 2003, 1:06:20 PM9/30/03

to

Tomas Penc wrote:

What's wrong with all you guys? Don't you know that you're supposed to
use vi?

EMACS? Pshaw. I even use vi (vim) on Windows. (I do.)

Now Ant, on the other hand, there's a Java programmer's friend.

John Bollinger
jobo...@indiana.edu

:^)

Ville Oikarinen

unread,

Oct 6, 2003, 3:51:35 AM10/6/03

to

I think it's good to know how to program with an editor and Ant.

Once you really understand what's going on with them (all the classpath stuff,
incremental building etc), it's a lot more efficient to work with IDEs and
overcome their shortcomings. Because you will eventually find yourself in a
situation where you need to automate something or do something else no IDE
provides support for.

But on the other hand, the everyday programming work is MUCH faster with instant
javadoc, real-time compiling, refactoring, special editors for properties or
layouts and other nice features you get by using a good IDE.

Of course there are some people who really don't care about the "internals" and
are quite happy with IDEs that hide all the dirty details. And they seem to be
quite productive, too. I guess you just need to decide which group you belong
to.

Ville Oikarinen

Robert Klemme

unread,

Oct 6, 2003, 7:20:18 AM10/6/03

to

"Ville Oikarinen" <vi...@oikarinen.org> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:3f811f06$0$269$4d4e...@read.news.fi.uu.net...

> I think it's good to know how to program with an editor and Ant.
>
> Once you really understand what's going on with them (all the classpath
stuff,
> incremental building etc), it's a lot more efficient to work with IDEs
and

Did you mean to say "without IDEs" here?

> overcome their shortcomings. Because you will eventually find yourself
in a
> situation where you need to automate something or do something else no
IDE
> provides support for.

Well, that's what plugins or ant scripts are for. Some IDE's support such
kinds of customizations.

> But on the other hand, the everyday programming work is MUCH faster with
instant
> javadoc, real-time compiling, refactoring, special editors for
properties or
> layouts and other nice features you get by using a good IDE.
>
> Of course there are some people who really don't care about the
"internals" and
> are quite happy with IDEs that hide all the dirty details. And they seem
to be
> quite productive, too. I guess you just need to decide which group you
belong
> to.

Cheers

robert

Ville Oikarinen

unread,

Oct 7, 2003, 8:25:15 AM10/7/03

to

"Robert Klemme" <bob....@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:blrjo1$fjfrt$2...@ID-52924.news.uni-berlin.de...

> > Once you really understand what's going on with them (all the classpath
> stuff,
> > incremental building etc), it's a lot more efficient to work with IDEs
> and
>
> Did you mean to say "without IDEs" here?

No. I mean that it's more efficient to use an IDE if you know how to do the same
things without it i.e. understand all the concepts.

> > overcome their shortcomings. Because you will eventually find yourself
> in a
> > situation where you need to automate something or do something else no
> IDE
> > provides support for.
>
> Well, that's what plugins or ant scripts are for. Some IDE's support such
> kinds of customizations.

That's true. But I think it's easier to learn ant without an IDE, first. You
know, one thing at a time so if there are problems you know where to look. If
you try to learn java basics, ant basics and IDE basics at the same time, how
can you know what breaks when it breaks?

But as I said, some people like to start using IDEs right away and succeed quite
well. There are many learning strategies.

Ville Oikarinen

Jussi Jumppanen

unread,

Oct 8, 2003, 9:27:54 PM10/8/03

to

Robert Klemme wrote:

> I wouldn't want to miss eclipse. A lot of things are most easily
> done, including version control and documentation lookup. You don't
> get that with an editor

That might be true for the simplest of text editors but it is
definitely not true for a good programmers text editor.

For example Zeus has fully integrated CVS and a Quick Help feature
that will search for a keyword in any number of chm help files and
display the result in seconds.

I am sure there a are plenty of programmers editors that provide
these exact same features.

I would say IDE's are very good for is GUI creation (ie form layout)
and they usually have very good integrated debuggers, but their
actual text editor usually are lacking when it comes to the task
of emulation popular keyboard mappings.

Jussi Jumppanen
Author of: Zeus for Windows (All new version 3.90 out now)
"The C/C++, Java, HTML, FTP, Python, PHP, Perl programmer's editor"
Home Page: http://www.zeusedit.com