←back to thread

511 points mootrichard | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.415s | source
Show context
recursivedoubts ◴[] No.23990262[source]
Cool. And glad to see this called out:

Better IDE integration: Parsing RBS files gives IDEs better understanding of the Ruby code. Method name completions run faster. On-the-fly error reporting detects more problems. Refactoring can be more reliable!

IDE support (autocomplete, refactoring and quick documentation) is the most important reason to annotate argument and return types.

replies(1): >>23990372 #
bytematic ◴[] No.23990372[source]
I've been using typescript for a few years now and to be honest I almost never rely on the compilation errors. I just use the built in Jetbrains IDE completion, autosuggestion, and navigation to make it work.
replies(1): >>23990480 #
recursivedoubts ◴[] No.23990480[source]
Yep. A good IDE to a first approximation doesn't allow compilation errors to occur because you are auto-completing everything, including symbol completion based on the type at cursor, etc.

Jetbrains is a wonderful company.

replies(1): >>23990995 #
smabie ◴[] No.23990995[source]
Since the advent of LSP, I think the value proposition of a full featured IDE has been greatly diminished.

For example, I used to use Intellij for Scala but recently switched to Emacs+Metals and haven't really missed anything. In fact, it's probably an even better editing experience.

Intellij still has better refactoring (though I don't use it much), and the integrated debugger and database viewer are really nice. I've found myself using Emacs and only switching to Intellij for the aforementioned specialized tasks.

5 years ago you would have been crazy not using an IDE for JVM work but this is no longer the case. LSP is such a wonderful technology and has empowered the creation of new programming languages like never before. It's truly remarkable.

If I was Intellij, I would be a little worried about my future market share. They simply can't provide the same value as before, and I'm not sure how they intend to change that.

replies(3): >>23991611 #>>23996107 #>>24004650 #
1. yawaramin ◴[] No.24004650[source]
Does Metals have a feature to add parameter names at method callsites? I use that IntelliJ feature of the Scala plugin all the time, it's such a lifesaver.