Related
I was wondering whether there is an easy way to synchronize your preferences/settings across VS Code and VS 2019?
You can go to Tools -> Options -> Environement -> Keyboard
Syncing Settings Across VS Code & VS 2022
I think I have a pretty good idea of what you're asking for, and I would say that they don't have what you are thinking to have. Like, if you wonder that since they are both funded by Microsoft dollars, that there maybe some sort of interoperability, but there's not. Many people have have been hoping for some time to see Visual Studio work in harmony with V.S. Code, but I don't think that will ever happen like many people are hoping it will. The reason is, they are fundamentally — at the very core of what they are — very different beasts. While, as I pointed out, they are both developed by Microsoft dollars, and they are both "Development Environments", they are not both "Integrated Environments", and there in lies the difference that makes them worlds apart.
Visual Studio (the IDE) is considered to be an IDE — integrated is the keyword here — because it integrates into the projects that are built using Visual Studio as the Development Environment. Visual Studio Code does not integrate into projects, instead it allows you to structure the project, provide the compiler, debugger, and things like a build system, RTE, REPL, libraries, modules, plugins, the Languages themselves, etc... You are the master of your own environment with V.S. Code, and where developers have much more control over their projects using a non-integrated dev-env, especially one that's non-proprietary, they also have to put in much more work, to produce many of the same programs that Visual Studio can practically generate for you.
So the point here is, that you can't really swap configurations between the two, not for the majority of configured stuff, however; that's not to say that some settings cannot not be swapped. Any configuration that can have the same values applied to it, whether the configuration is in VS Code, or Visual Studio 2022, would not be unique to Visual Studio, and VS Code, and has nothing to do with the fact that they are both backed by Microsoft. In fact, if you have a group of settings, and those settings exist in both environments, and are able to accept all the same values (they can't accept any different values in any env) then that configuration will port to environments far beyond Visual Studio Code & Visual Studio 2022, and will probably be configurable in over 90% of the Development Environments out there. And this is something that software engineers, programmers & web-developers/designers take advantage of already, and it's referred to by its filename...
Dot-Editor-Config or .editorconfig
"Above is the Dot-Editor-Config Project's Logo."
EditorConfig, is a good gig, but it won't configure entire environments. Like most tools, the more you use it, the better you will get at making use of it. It seems to me that it is more useful across IDE's, as IDEs, as I explained above, work similarly (obviously), so they have more settings in common. Editor config basically creates a medium for setting semantics. Since settings found in different Development Environments are often called something different in each environment, what the .editorconfig file does, is it gives a single name for each of the variation of the setting that ports across environments, and gives a single place to configure the setting, allowing you to take one file from IDE to IDE. Like I said though, there is only so much it will configure, and it works better between IDE's than between IDE and Editor, at least IMHO.
Check Editor Config out, and see what you think.
I used to use it mainly to configure formatting across C++ projects, but CLang's CLang-Format Tool has become such a good tool that I did away with it.
This link will take you to the Dot-Editor-Config GitHub Repository, where you can find the .editorconfig extensions for...
VS Code
Visual Studio
JetBrains
Emacs
Vim
...and probably many more.
I did some research, or lack-of I should say, after authoring this. I couldn't find any other options out there. There really isn't a lot in the way to help in porting configurations, except for .editorconfig, and really .editorconfig won't do much between an IDE & Editor than configure formatting styles. You can get that same functionality with Prettier, CLang, ESLint, and many other tools. Editor-config doesn't just configure its-self though, like a formatter does, so I am sure you can find some extras it targets, but It's not so much that I use it. A lot of people do, though.
Dot Editor Config GitHub Repo
Watching this thought as well. I've been working in VSCode for a few years off and on as needed. But the full VS IDE (2022 currently) is both more complicated and more capable, so I'm running both.
Then realized that many of the extensions may (should?) be cross-usable, but still digging through that to determine what 'reality' looks like.
Sensible question though.
Apple introduced Xcode source editor extensions with Xcode 8.
Will Xcode 8 still support plugins served via Alcatraz?
Xcode 8 prohibits code injection (the way plugins used to load) for security reasons. You can circumvent this by removing the code signing on Xcode. Both of these tools are capable of simplifying that:
https://github.com/inket/update_xcode_plugins
https://github.com/fpg1503/MakeXcodeGr8Again
To work on Xcode 8+ without removing the code signing, plugins will have to be rewritten as Xcode Source Editor Extensions. Unfortunately, the APIs for these extensions only allow for text replacement at the moment, so they are not an adequate replacement.
I've filed a report on rdar, do not hesitate to express your mind as well:
Xcode is a primary tool for the development on all Apple platforms.
People can either love or hate it, the fact is it's still the most
powerful development tool around.
Lots of its power and usefulness has been achieved by 3rd-party
plugins, later covered by the Alcatraz project, which is the number
one extension management system for Xcode, as vital and needed as for
example npm is needed for Node.js. It's all based on a fair, aware
community developing its helpful open-source extras and publishing
them on GitHub. It's not a code-injecting ghetto targeting infecting
stuff. It's a community within a community.
Xcode 8 tends to drop support for these plugins, most often being
narrated as a security step in favour of preventing distribution of
injected stuff. This is false; you simply can't prevent that 'cause
there's always someone who finds the way. This step simply makes Xcode
was less usable, complicated and not that feature-rich. There are many
important plugins which developers love, contribute and move forward
to make Xcode even better, tell yourself honestly, mostly even better
than you could in a short period.
The community needs powerful stuff. Way more powerful than basic
source-editing magic. Please reconsider this step in a spirit of
community and support to your developers.
In last years, there's a move towards closing your platform. First
shutting down Spotlight plugins and its great Flashlight plugins
manager, which is simply great and now I need to disable Rootless to
use it. Now it's Xcode plugins. You're doing more and more to make
developers and power users feel sad and not having their computing
device in their hands.
There's a detailed discussion on Alcatraz repo, it says everything:
https://github.com/alcatraz/Alcatraz/issues/475
I'm attaching a list of great plugins I simply can't spend a day
without:
AxeMode – Xcode issues patching Backlight – active line highlighting
ClangFormat – code formatter DerivedData Exterminator – daily need
getting rid or bad stuff FuzzyAutocomplete – name says it all, still
more powerful than Xcode completion HighlightSelectedString MCLog –
console log filtering, including regexes OMColorSense Polychromatic –
variables colouring, cute stuff RSImageOptimPlugin – processing PNG
files before committing SCXcodeMinimap – love this SublimeText-thingy!
XCFixin_FindFix – fixing Find features XcodeRefactoringPlus – patching
Refactor functionality, still buggy, but less than Xcode without
plugin XToDo – TODOs collection ZLGotoSandbox – 'cause dealing with
your folders would be a hell without it
Most of them are not source code-related, thus deserve having a way to
be loaded and working like a charm again.
You can certainly load all your plugins by recode signing Xcode 8.0. All credits to the XVim team. They seemed to solve this problem.
https://github.com/XVimProject/XVim/blob/master/INSTALL_Xcode8.md
The Most Important Step From The Solution
There is no support and we can't expect any. Apple decides to shut down the ecosystem around the Alcatraz package manager before they have an api ready (extensions) that is able to do what the plugins were doing before. The extensions are currently limited to the text frame which does not allow to do much.
The main reason announced by apple is security and we can now disable code signing with effort to get back the most important features that were missing in Xcode.
Bad day for the community, bad decision from apple.
I also recommend the discussion on Alcatraz here: https://github.com/alcatraz/Alcatraz/issues/475
Most importantly if you want to support Alcatraz file a bug at http://bugreport.apple.com to make them aware that many people are suffering with this change
I did the same (openradar.appspot.com/28423208):
Xcode is a primary tool for the development on all Apple platforms.
People can either love or hate it, the fact is it's still the most
powerful development tool around.
Lots of its power and usefulness has been achieved by 3rd-party plugins, later covered by the Alcatraz project, which is the number
one extension management system for Xcode, as vital and needed as for
example npm is needed for Node.js. It's all based on a fair, aware
community developing its helpful open-source extras and publishing
them on GitHub. It's not a code-injecting ghetto targeting infecting
stuff. It's a community within a community.
Xcode 8 tends to drop support for these plugins, most often being narrated as a security step in favour of preventing distribution of
injected stuff. This is false; you simply can't prevent that 'cause
there's always someone who finds the way. This step simply makes Xcode
was less usable, complicated and not that feature-rich. There are many
important plugins which developers love, contribute and move forward
to make Xcode even better, tell yourself honestly, mostly even better
than you could in a short period.
The community needs powerful stuff. Way more powerful than basic source-editing magic. Please reconsider this step in a spirit of
community and support to your developers.
In last years, there's a move towards closing your platform. First shutting down Spotlight plugins and its great Flashlight plugins
manager, which is simply great and now I need to disable Rootless to
use it. Now it's Xcode plugins. You're doing more and more to make
developers and power users feel sad and not having their computing
device in their hands.
There's a detailed discussion on Alcatraz repo, it says everything:
github.com/alcatraz/Alcatraz/issues/475
I'm attaching a list of great plugins I simply can't spend a day without:
AutoHighlightSymbol - Add highlights to the currently selected token
ClangFormat – code formatter
DerivedData Exterminator – daily need getting rid or bad stuff
FuzzyAutocomplete – name says it all, still more powerful than Xcode completion
KZLinkedConsole - be able to click on a link in the console to open the relevant file and be faster to debug
PreciseCoverage - nicer gui than xcode provides to view the coverage
XcodeColors - shows colors in the console depending on log level (how else should a console be used?)
Most of them are not source code-related, thus deserve having a way to be loaded and working like a charm again.
If you do not make a fast step to support your community i'm sure we
will find another platform to work with.
Seems like this should work. Found some answers here:
https://github.com/alcatraz/Alcatraz/issues/475
The key seems to be to removing code signing in order to get existing plugins to work.
Apparently not :'(
https://github.com/alcatraz/Alcatraz/issues/475
We have to wait until someone convert the plugins into the new Xcode Extensions
this question, though has nothing to do with the programming stuff, gets me bugged while I try to delve deeper a bit. I am confused with what this IDE means. somewhere it says its an editor or somewhere like its some PHP editor. I use dreamweaver normally and notepad ++ occasionally .. Is this what IDE is ? or is that I have misunderstood things.??
An integrated development environment is generally a whole bunch of tools integrated into one.
This includes editor, compiler, debugger and whatever other tools you may want to add.
Back in pre-history, we used to use an editor to edit the files, then we would exit and use a compiler, then a linker to produce the final product (actually, when I first started, we used punch cards and 80x25 data entry sheets and handed them to data entry operators for input into the computer, but I don't want to bore the youngsters among you).
Nowadays we just press the F5 key or, if you use Emacs,
CTRLALTMETAOPEN-APPLEATTNLEFT-SHIFTRIGHT_SHIFTB
while holding our heads inclined at an angle of 22.5o to the Earth's magnetic field and biting the head off a chicken :-)
Some IDEs (such as Eclipse) provide a plug-in environment where people can create plug-ins to add many tools to the standard ones. Think in terms of:
source code control and versioning.
support for multiple (computer) languages.
refactoring tools.
direct publishing of applications to environments (such as EAR files to an application server).
extraction of strings for internationalisation
and so on, ad near infinitum.
Think; everything you need to write, build, run, and debug your application in one program.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 12 years ago.
This may be too opinionated, but what I'm trying to understand why some companies mandate the use of an IDE. In college all I used was vim, although on occasion I used netbeans for use with Java. Netbeans was nice because it did code completion and had some nice templates for configuration of some the stranger services I tried.
Now that my friends are working at big companies, they are telling me that they are required to use eclipse or visual studio, but no one can seem to give a good reason why.
Can someone explain to me why companies force their developers into restricted development environments?
IDE vs Notepad
I've written code in lots of different IDEs and occasionally in notepad. You may totally love notepad, but at some point using notepad is industrial sabatoge, kind of like hiring a gardener who shows up with a spoon instead of a shovel and a thimble instead of a bucket. (But who knows, maybe the most beautiful garden can be made with a spoon and a thimble, but it sure isn't going to be fast)
IDE A vs IDE B
Some IDE's have team and management features. For example, in Visual Studio, there is a screen that finds all the TODO: lines in source code. This allows for a different workflow that may or may not exist in other IDEs. Ditto for source control integration, static code analysis, etc.
IDE old vs IDE new
Big organizations are slow to change. Not really a programming related problem.
Because companies standardize on tools, as well as platforms--if your choice of tools is in conflict with their standards then you can either object, silently use your tool, or use the required tool.
All three are valid; provided your alternative doesn't cause other team-members issues, and provided that you have a valid argument to make (not just whining).
For example: I develop in Visual Studio 2008 as required by work, but use VS2010 whenever possible. Solutions/Projects saved in 2010 can't be opened in 2008 without some manual finagling--so I can't use the tool of my choice because it would cause friction for other developers. We also are required to produce code according to documented standards which are enforced by Resharper and StyleCop--if I switched to a different IDE I would have more difficulty in ensuring the code I produced was up to our standards.
If you're good at using vim and know everything there is to know about it, then there is no reason to switch to an IDE. That said, many IDEs will have lots of useful features that come standard. Maintaining an install of Eclipse is a lot easier than maintaining an install of Vim with plugins X, Y, and Z in order to simulate the same capabilities.
IntelliSense is incredibly useful. I realize that vim has all sorts of auto-completion, but it doesn't give me a list of overloaded methods and argument hints.
Multiple panes to provide class hierarchies/outlines, API reference, console output, etc.. can provide you more information than is available in just multiple text buffers. Yes, I know that you have the quickfix window, but sometimes it's just not enough.
Compile as you type. This doesn't quite work for C++, but is really nice in Java and C#. As soon as I type a line, I'll get feedback on correctness. I'm not arrogant enough as a programmer to assume that I never make syntax errors, or type errors, or forget to have a try/catch, or... (the list goes on)
And the most important of all...
Integrated Debuggers. Double click to set a break point, right click on a variable to set a watch, have a separate pane for changing values on the fly, detailed exception handling all within the same program.
I love vim, and will use it for simple things, or when I want to run a macro, or am stuck with C code. But for more complicated tasks, I'll fire up Eclipse/Visual Studio/Wing.
Sufficiently bad developers are greatly assisted by the adoption of an appropriately-configured IDE. It takes a lot of extra time to help each snowflake through his own custom development environment; if somebody doesn't have the chops to maintain their own dev environment independently, it gets very expensive to support them.
Corporate IT shops are very bad at telling the difference between "sufficiently bad" and "sufficiently good" developers. So they just make everybody do the same thing.
Disclaimer: I use Eclipse and love it.
Theoretically, it would decrease the amount of training needed to get an unexperienced developer to deal with the problems of a particular IDE if all the team uses that one tool.
Anyway, most of the top companies don't force developers to use some specific IDE for now...
I agree with this last way of thinking: You don't need your team to master one particular tool, having team knowledge in many will improve your likelyhood to know better ways to solve a particular roblems.
For me, I use Visual Studio with ReSharper. I cannot be nearly as productive (in .Net) without it. At least, nobody has ever shown me a way to be more productive... Vim, that is great. You can run Vim inside of Visual Studio + R# and get all the niceties that the IDE provides, like code navigation, code completion and refactoring.
Same reason we use a hammer to nail things instead of rocks. It's a better tool.
Now if you are asking why you are forced to use a specific IDE over another, well that's a different topic.
A place that uses .NET will use Visual Studio 99% of the time, at least that's what I've seen. And I haven't found anything out there that is better than Visual Studio for writing .NET applications.
There is much more than code completion into an IDE:
debugging facilities
XML validation
management of servers
automatic imports
syntax checking
graphical modeling
support of popular technologies like Hibernate, TestNG or Spring
integration of source code management
indexing of file names for quick opening
follow "links" in code: implementation, declaration
integration of source code control
searching for classes or methods
code formatting
process monitoring
one click/button debugging/building
method/variable/field/... renaming
etc
Nothing to do with incompetence from the programmers. Anybody would be A LOT less productive using vim for developing a big Java EE application.
How big were you projects at college? A couple of classes in a couple of files? Or rather a couple of hundreds of classes in a couple of hundreds of files?
Today I had the "honor" of looking at a file in a rather large project where the programmer opted to use vi (yes vi, not vim) and a handcrafted commandline compiler call (no make). The file contained on function spanning about 900 lines with a series of if-else-if-else-constructs (because that way you have all your code in one place!!!!!!). Macho-Programmer at his finest.
OK there are very good reasons for enforcing a particular toolset within a production environment:
Companies want to standardize everything so that if an employee leaves they can replace that person with minimal effort.
Commercial IDEs provide a complex enough environment to support a single interface for a variety of development needs and supporting varying levels of code access. For instance the same file-set could be used by the developer, by non-programmers (graphics designers etc.) and document writers.
Combine this with integrated version control and code management without the need of someone learning a particular version control system, all of a sudden IDEs start to look nicer and nicer.
It also streamlines maintenance of build systems in a multi-homed environment.
IDEs are easier to give tutorials to via phone or video, and probably come with those.
etc. etc. and so forth.
The business decision making behind enforcing a standardized environment goes beyond the preference of a single programmer or for that matter perhaps the understanding of the programming team.
Using an IDE helps an employee to work with huge projects with minimal training. Learn a few key combos - and you will comfortably work with multi-thousand-file project in Eclipse, IDE handles most of the work for you under the hood. Just imagine how many years of learning it takes to feel comfortable developing such projects in Vim.
Besides, with an IDE it is easy to support common coding standards across the entire team: just set a couple of options and an IDE will force you to write code in a standardized way.
Plus, IDE gives a few added bonuses like refactoring tools (especially good in Eclipse), integrated debugging (especially good in Visual Studio), intellisense, integrated unit tests, integrated version control system etc.
The advantages and disadvantages of using an IDE also greatly depends on the development platform. Some platforms are geared towards the use of IDEs, others are not. As a rule of thumb, you should use IDE for Java and .Net development (unless you're extremely advanced); you should not use IDE for ruby, python, perl, LISP etc development (unless you're extremely new to these languages and associated frameworks).
Features like these aren't available in vim:
Refactoring
Integrated debuggers
Knowing your code base as an integrated whole (e.g., change a Java class name; have the change reflected in a Spring XML configuration)
Being able to run an app server right inside the IDE so you can deploy and debug your code.
Those are the reasons I choose IntelliJ. I could go back to sticks and bones, but I'd be a lot less productive.
As said before, the question about using an IDE is basicaly productivity. However there is some questions that should be considered by the company when choosing a specific IDE. that includes:
Company culture
Standardize use of tool, making it accessible for all developers. That easies training, reduces costs and improve the speed of learn curve.
Requirements from specific contract. As an example, there are some development packages that are fully supported (i.e. plugins) by some IDE and not by anothers. So, if you are working with the support contract you will want to work with the supported IDE. A concrete example is when you are working with not common OS like VxWorks, where you can work with the Workbench (that truely is an eclipse with lot of specific plugins for eclipse).
Company policy (and also I include the restriction on company budget)
Documentation relating to the IDE
Comunity (A strong one can contribute and develop still further the IDE and help you with your doubts)
Installed Base (no one wants to be the only human to use that IDE on the world)
Support from manufacturers (an IDE about to be discontinued probably will not be a good option)
Requirements from the IDE. (i.e. cross platform or hardware requirements that are incompatible with some machines of the company)
Of course, there is a lot more. However, I think that this short list help you to see that there is some decisions that are not so easy to take, when we are talking about money and some greater companies.
And if you start using your own IDE think what mess will be when another developer start doing maintenance into your code. How do you think will the application be signed at the version manager ? Now think about a company with 30+ developers each using its own IDE (each with its own configuration files, version and all that stuff)...
http://xkcd.com/378/
Real programmers use the best tools available to get the job done. Some companies have licenses for tools but there's nothing saying you can't license/use another IDE and then just have the other IDE open to copy/paste what you've done in your local IDE.
The question is a bit open-ended, perhaps you can make it community wiki...
As you point out, the IDE can be useful, or even a must have, for some operations, like refactoring, or even project exploring: I use Eclipse at my work, on Java projects, and I find very useful to get a list of all occurrences of the usage of a public method or a class in a project. Likely, I appreciate to be able to rename it from where it is defined, and having all these occurrences automatically updated.
The fact I have the JavaDoc displayed when hovering over a name is very nice too. Like autocompletion, jump to a class name, etc.
And, of course, debugging facilities...
Now, usage of Eclipse isn't mandatory in our shop! Some years ago, some people used the Delphi IDE (forgot its name), I tried NetBeans, etc. But I think we de facto standardized on Eclipse, but it was a natural evolution rather than a company policy. And we often just open files in a text editor when we need a quick update...
see also VB.NET Static Code Anaylsis
For better or for worst we now have a VB.NET coding standards document that is based on a C# coding standard as enforced by StyleCop.
For example
the number of spaces you should put in each side of a “+” sign etc
all instance Members (fields and methods!) must be access as “me.fieldName”
all shared members must be accessed as “className.fieldName”
As I tend to think:
If it’s in a requirements document it
should be check for by an automatic
system
I am looking for (ideally free) tools that will check for that short of rules on VB.NET code, as these are style issues that don’t make it into the compiled output, FxCop is not useful.
(I would personally match rather that we just check for important things like duplicated code and single reasonability for each class (so no more multi thousand line classes!), but as I need to keep to the coding standard document I wish to have a tool to help me do so.)
see also Enforcing using the class name whenever a shared member is accessed.
About the bounty.
I am looking for a list of VB.NET code checking tools, with a short summery of what each tool can do and its limitations. If the tools are not free, please include some ideal of cost.
Does anyone have experience using CodeRush/Refactor! or ReSharper with VB.NET to check for this type of coding style issues?
I know of no free source code analysis tools with good VB support. There are, however, at least two commercial tools that may be suitable:
submain CodeIt.Right
SSW Code Auditor
Personally, I prefer the CodeIt.Right rule authoring mechanism, so I would favour it if considerable custom rule development were planned. However, if you just want to use out-of-the box rules, Code Auditor ships with quite a few more code style rules than CodeIt.Right, most of whose built-in rules target the compiled IL (like FxCop).
The only ones I know of are:
Microsoft's FxCop
Of course, this only operates on compiled assemblies, so doesn't give the same functionality as StyleCop, and certainly won't help with things like naming schemes.
However, the closest thing is:
Aivosto's Project Analyzer v9.0 for Visual Basic, VB.NET and VBA
The full version is not free, but this is the closest thing to StyleCop for VB.NET that I can find.
There have been a number of calls for a VB.NET version of Microsoft's StyleCop, such as those in this thread on the code.msdn.microsoft.com site. That same thread also gives some good insight into why a VB.NET version doesn't exist.
I use ReSharper on a daily basis and I find it fine for both code formatting and for solving naming issues. It allows to configure how naming must be enforced, how issues are displayed (hint, suggestion, warning, etc) and provides a precise code formatter (space, paranthesis, line breaks, this qualifier, etc).
Note that I don't know if it can be run in batch mode.
Turning Option Explicit on by default is always a great idea and should be standard practice. I would argue it should be turned on by default in VS out of the box. But it doesn't come close to enforcing the out of the box rules that StyleCop does for C#, nor does it allow for you to create your own rules.
The whole reason for StyleCop's existence is because FxCop only works on compiled assemblies, leaving web projects out in the cold for a similar tool. With StyleCop, web developers get the same great rule enforcement and tight VS integration. It is a great tool for any C# developer.
It is unfortunate that it is only C# capable, a VB version would satisfy a large community that is left wanting something similar.
There already is a very good style tool built into the VB compiler. It is called Option Explicit On, put it at the top of the source code file or use Tools + Options + Project and Solutions + VB Defaults, Option Explicit = On. If that wasn't turned on previously there could be a mountain of errors when you compile your code after changing that.
If it is clean or already turned on, consider that you are 95% close to writing clean C# code and that the language doesn't really matter anymore.