[Israel.pm] Completion and editors (offtopic)

Yuval Yaari yuval at windax.com
Wed Jun 9 00:26:11 PDT 2004


Mikhael Goikhman wrote:

>Yuval, I don't think you may convince me auto-completion is any good.
>Really, it is slow (type, resolve conflicts), inconvenient (find your
>choice in the long list of all global and local variables), helpless
>(you can't see the variable description, or the code it is used in) and
>distracts from actual coding. It is very editor dependent. If the editor
>(I guess ctags is used here) fails to parse the Perl code, you are
>screwed, because you forgot to think on your own, you are the editor
>slave now. Joking.
>  
>
And I assume closing your editor, opening a new one, looking for that 
variables, getting back to the first editor, and pasting the variable is 
much better..?
This sounds like it should distract you from your code.
Auto-completion works without you even moving your eyes from the line 
you're working on.
That's why I like it.
Also, just try to split the window, should be much easier for you.

I'm just trying to understand how auto-completion, which improved my 
development (time and "correctness" [i.e: I always get a real variable 
name - never fails use strict;]), might be the wrong choice.

>It is wrong that emacs and vim parse Perl correctly. At least in the
>versions I have installed, emacs does not even colorize /regexp/, and it
>screws /reg"exp/ completely (the rest of the file is randomly colorized).
>vim does not handle s at regexp@replace@ and many other cases. And even if
>these cases are fixed in the latest versions, I may always find the code
>to fail. Usually my code is always incorrectly colorized, probably
>because I don't use these editors and never test how they display it.
>I think many people perform a lot of irrelevant workarounds to make
>their editors happy. "Smart" editors are almost always a bad idea.
>  
>
Use notepad. It has all the features you need.
I personally require much more of a program that I use on a daily basis, 
and basically, all day long.

>You are wrong that my editor supports auto-completion, it did not even
>support colorizing up until now, and I didn't miss it at all. I use the
>customized joe editor, it is not graphical and not smart, it just does
>everything I want in a moment.
>  
>
Ok, so some editors (joe and notepad... pico...) do not do it.
Why would you use such a featureless editor, I don't know.
I bet your code (indention - wise) is horrible as a side effect :)
All I have to do is just press RETURN and my editor indents the next 
line for me.
As I said, your editor should make you focus on the serious stuff, and 
not how many TABS (or spaces) you need to press to get the line indented 
well.
Same thing as for auto-completion.

>As for having to find the place where the variable is declared or used in
>order to copy it. Yes, I find this a very good practice if you actually
>want to ensure you use the correct variable/function. It is like browsing
>the man page before using something. This task can't be automated. It
>takes me about 5 seconds to find the relevant code. Sometimes I do this
>by escaping to shell (Ctrl-Z) and running grep or another temporary joe.
>Here file completion is a must, unlike variable completion.
>  
>
Again, I used to do it.
I found auto-completion weird, not comfortable, etc.
But now that I'm used to it it's MUCH faster and easier.
Also, I stay focused on my code.
And if your variables don't have clear names, you're in big troubles.
Did I mention that grep should integrate into your editor? :)

As for being perfectly certain that you're using the right variable, I 
would from time to time split the window, and in one window go looking 
for that variable.
If, for example, I use a set of the same 5 variables over 10 lines, 
copy-pasting wouldn't be as effecient as auto-completion.
Especially after you're certain of the variable names, etc.
Please don't tell me you'd use Klipper for this, this is also not effecient.

What you're describing is a case where you force yourself into working 
in stupid ways because of your editor, instead of just finding the right 
tool.

And yes, I find leaving the editor and opening a new one stupid.
At least your editor should let you split the damn window.

>I think I know why you may not like copy/paste. It is pretty inconvenient
>in most of the graphical editors, because they move the cursor when you
>copy a text, at least by default. It is much more convenient in pure
>xterm. Start a non graphical emacs with $DISPLAY unset to see what I am
>speaking about. The whole copy/paste in xterm is just "copy anywhere
>(does not move the cursor)", "press middle mouse to paste". Sometimes the
>thing to copy is in the previous page, so you may want to press PgDn/PgUp
>before and after copying. Here emacs and vim fail completely again, PgDn
>+ PgUp do not restore the original cursor position as expected, and there
>is no option to do it right (in vim you may use virtualedit, but this is
>not a solution).
>  
>
Who said I'm using Emacs? :)
Ok... Who said I'm using graphical Emacs?
And xterm reeks.
I use Konsole and I use emacs -nw. Always.
You're talking nonsense as for the PgDn PgUp thing (I just tried it), 
and also, using auto-completion, I would never have to use PgUp PgDn in 
the first place!
And you said auto-completion gets you out of focus, I bet your mind work 
really well with all those PgUps/PgDns.
At least don't say you stay focues on your code, because you can't be, 
while exiting the editor 2000 times a day, greping/opening a new editor, 
copying, returning to the editor, and pasting (PgUp/PgDn too ...).
Can't you see it's the most hack-ish way into finding the variable you want?
Also, that works for 1 variable at a time.

All I do is type something like this:
print $Ca[M-/], "\n";
And what I get is:
print $CarColor, "\n";
Of course I press M-/ untill I reach my goal.
This keeps me really focused on the original line (which usually is more 
complex than this example :)).
To be honest, I hardly even have to think (not the MS-Windows kind of 
way, though) about it - I just make sure the variable is what I want.
Either I give good names, or I take a glance using split-windows, etc - 
but I don't have to do it all the time, especially after I already know 
the name of the variable I want.
After all, how many times would you want to use a variable that you have 
no idea of its name?
Even when I do want to copy-paste, my editor lets me do it withouth 
leaving the current line and without leaving the current window.

So let me know how you stay focused this way, especially when you need 
to copy-paste a set of more than 1 variable.
Please elaborate on how this is more effecient, or better, than 
auto-completion in terms of staying focused on your code.
I might be wrong!

>Ok, let's stop here otherwise I will suggest to disable auto-indentation
>in your editor completely just because it never works correctly. :)
>
It always works correctly - esp. if you give good names to your variables.
$tmp_* $migo_* and $naxuy_* are bad names :)


  --Yuval




More information about the Perl mailing list