|
I've never felt the need to use VS Code rather than Visual Studio.
In a closed society where everybody's guilty, the only crime is getting caught. In a world of thieves, the only final sin is stupidity. - Hunter S Thompson - RIP
|
|
|
|
|
We have to because we're coding in javascript/react...
I really enjoy it when the vscode debugger randomly creates a breakpoint in one of the bundle files or randomly deletes a breakpoint on its own, or when you paste code into a file, it automatically scrolls you to the bottom of that file (a true pain when that file is thousands of lines long, or when code thinks there's an error when it obviously isn't but the crappy intellisense simply hasn't caught up with your typing...
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
All I can say about VS Code is that when it was first introduced, I was rather excited to see a decent "plain" code editor from MS that could load in roughly the same amount of time as Notepad (definitely quicker than Visual Studio itself) when all I needed was to just take a quick look at some source with something that has at least a little bit of intelligence (enough to understand the syntax).
Then they quickly proceeded to throw in everything but the kitchen sink, and it rapidly lost the ability to load quickly. It's still quicker than the full-blown Visual Studio, but it's now slow enough I can't say it serves that purpose anymore...
|
|
|
|
|
Notepad++ is my favourite quick editor.
GCS/GE d--(d) s-/+ a C+++ U+++ P-- L+@ E-- W+++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
The shortest horror story: On Error Resume Next
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, I've used Notepad++ for years (I still have it installed on a system or two and keep it up to date), but man, it's still ugly as sin.
|
|
|
|
|
Likewise - it's quick and does the job most of the time.
I still miss brief, though. Sadly we stopped using that years ago.
|
|
|
|
|
I find it perfect and clean, I like its interface.
Also the ability to split views and lock the horizontal and or vertical scroll between the two views is absolutely priceless!
GCS/GE d--(d) s-/+ a C+++ U+++ P-- L+@ E-- W+++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
The shortest horror story: On Error Resume Next
|
|
|
|
|
den2k88 wrote: Also the ability to split views and lock the horizontal and or vertical scroll between the two views is absolutely priceless!
That should be a standard feature for all editors.
Heck all controls should inherit that right from Windows itself.
|
|
|
|
|
I used Notepad++ for a while (until I'd read that an extension was hacked and introduced malware); then I tried SublimeText - but it had way more than I needed (still paid a donation); started using VS Code: I keep the number of extensions to a minimum. Of course, I have Visual Studio for larger, complex projects.
Time is the differentiation of eternity devised by man to measure the passage of human events.
- Manly P. Hall
Mark
Just another cog in the wheel
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe you should ditch a few extensions you don't really need. On my system (aged 4+ yrs) it starts up and loads my main project in about 2-3 seconds.
|
|
|
|
|
If there's any "extension I don't really need", they come bundled with VS Code itself. How do I know what it needs vs what's superfluous? And if it's superfluous, why is it included with a default setup (is my real rant...)?
|
|
|
|
|
Agreed, MS includes too much in the basic setup, especially copilot seems to be a performance killer. That said, you can simply try to un-install any extension, if it's really needed, or something else depends on it you'll be notified. Additionally, there are plenty ways to troubleshoot extension performance and issues, but that assumes you're willing to invest some time to figure them out which may not be practical for you.
|
|
|
|
|
markchagers wrote: but that assumes you're willing to invest some time to figure them out which may not be practical for you.
Only up to a certain point. If VSCode could be made to load as quickly as Notepad, it'd be worth quite a bit of research time.
|
|
|
|
|
👋 all
Do you find yourself in a PR battle where you discuss if you should use const or const ref, or otherwise discuss why you use using to reduce the name of certain types, I can get so frustrated sometimes when I develop a feature or new code, I have it tested and all work and then you have this colleague who wants everything to be how he or she is seeing it and in the end it doesn’t matter as you spent more time discussing or changing it for their joy, code wise it would end up as the same code for the compiler.
|
|
|
|
|
dbstudio wrote: the same code for the compiler
The best possible code review result. No reason to worry.
|
|
|
|
|
That's one of the reasons I don't miss working on dev teams.
Check out my IoT graphics library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx
And my IoT UI/User Experience library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix
|
|
|
|
|
"Too many cooks spoil the broth!" Sometimes, this is the case with some projects.
"A little time, a little trouble, your better day"
Badfinger
|
|
|
|
|
dbstudio wrote: or otherwise discuss why you use using to reduce the name of certain types
What I can say for sure is a concise code is much more readable and that's why if there are several references made to get to a certain type then it's good to use usings.
If I had a dev who wasn't convinced with this reason alone, I'd do it myself.
|
|
|
|
|
GKP1992 wrote: concise code is much more readable
My code may not be concise in the same way yours is.
|
|
|
|
|
GKP1992 wrote: What I can say for sure is a concise code is much more readable
Obviously not true.
The C Users Journal used to do contests for single line programs with the shortest solution winning.
The were concise. And very difficult to read.
|
|
|
|
|
It's not about what it looks like to the compiler - it's about what it looks like to the *team*.
The cure is to establish reasonably rigid coding standards, and make sure everyone adheres to them.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
I strongly believe that it should be less rigid and more flexible and who don’t want to have a const signature if you are not changing the value, I feel the it’s more due to the fact of junior developers fresh out of school believing we are building a kernel or cathedral if you wish.
|
|
|
|
|
Nope the standards should be quite rigid, the senior developer setting the standards should be open to new ideas and concepts with a willingness to implement them. Junior and new hires (and everyone else) should be encouraged to put forward suggestions.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity -
RAH
I'm old. I know stuff - JSOP
|
|
|
|
|
#realJSOP wrote: it's about what it looks like to the *team*.
Exactly.
I write code so with the view that someone else (even if it is me) will need to understand it months or even years after I wrote it.
|
|
|
|
|
Either you have coding guidelines or you do not.
We have guidelines, they dates from the 80s and 90s (seriously).
The mantra has been don't change anything. (even crazy bad tab/spaces everywhere)
But...
When I go in a file to do work in it, I clean it up and bring it to more modern best practices as much as the underlying code allows me to do.
I wish I could go deeper, but time and money are not infinite.
CI/CD = Continuous Impediment/Continuous Despair
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
