HardCode IDE - Developers - Facepunch Forum

Will it have intellisence?And can I use it to write in C#?

[IMG]http://puu.sh/t3PU[/IMG] [IMG]http://i925.photobucket.com/albums/ad92/diehardSaxon/Humor/Burger-King-watching-you.gif[/IMG] 400 people browsing this thread, reddit i guess?

[QUOTE=darth-veger;35835596][IMG]http://puu.sh/t3PU[/IMG] [IMG]http://i925.photobucket.com/albums/ad92/diehardSaxon/Humor/Burger-King-watching-you.gif[/IMG] 400 people browsing this thread, reddit i guess?[/QUOTE] garry twittered it

140 people more think I'm an asshole. Great.

[QUOTE=swift and shift;35835629]garry twittered it[/QUOTE] Now I see what he meant

"All statements are first reviewed by the team. We always back our statements" Why would you say this and then post: "Firstly, Timmy? LOL. Ok" Seems like you are just pulling shit out of your ass now.

Looks nice. That live text collaboration platform sounds just what collaborative work needs! At least I would find it useful.

[QUOTE=Jookia;35835688]140 people more think I'm an asshole. Great.[/QUOTE] Better to be known as an asshole with some form of sense than someone who sucks every dick they can really. While the ideas behind this IDE could be quite useful, and customization is always nice to have. I have a bad feeling you're going to focus far too much on the customization aspects. Being able to change every aspect of the interface isn't a useful feature, and will probably relegate your userbase to the kinds who people who genuinely think Rainmeter and shell replacements are useful on a day to day basis (then fullscreen every application anyway).

This would be better with a Zenburn colour scheme, not "here let me shove blue and white LEDs in your eyes" tbh

[QUOTE=robowurmz;35836707]This would be better with a Zenburn colour scheme, not "here let me shove blue and white LEDs in your eyes" tbh[/QUOTE] or cobalt

[QUOTE=ROBO_DONUT;35810811]In general, software dev. really isn't like any form of engineering :\ In software, it's usually better to prototype, get feedback, and fix what actually needs fixing afterwards than to try to predict and control every step of the way. At least in my inexperienced opinion.[/QUOTE] Eh, I don't think that's fair. Essentially your goal as a software 'engineer' (let's call it that for the sake of the argument) is pretty much the Wikipedia definition of it: [quote][B]Engineering[/B] is the discipline, [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art"]art[/URL], skill, profession, and technology of acquiring and applying [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science"]scientific[/URL], [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematics"]mathematical[/URL], [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics"]economic[/URL], social, and practical knowledge, in order to [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design"]design[/URL] and build structures, machines, devices, systems, materials and [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Process_%28engineering%29"]processes[/URL].[/quote] In that sense, I think building software can definitely be called engineering. You are applying practical knowledge to design and build software/systems. Now, if we continue: [quote="American Engineers' Council for Professional Development engineering definition"]The creative application of scientific principles to design or develop structures, machines, apparatus, or manufacturing processes, or works utilizing them singly or in combination; or to construct or operate the same with full cognizance of their design; or to forecast their behavior under specific operating conditions; all as respects an intended function, economics of operation and safety to life and property.[/quote] Are we applying scientific principles? To be honest, I didn't study long enough to know if what we do is considered scientific. But essentially you define software and how it is supposed to act, in order for the software to work under specific conditions (and unexpected ones perhaps). This is what you do when writing software. You write a spec, you refine it, you write it, you test if it works, and if it does, you ship. Sure, you might have bugs, but other fields have that problem: bridges have been built that couldn't handle enough load, specifications are sometimes inaccurate leading to decisions being taken on the fly to deal with this, etc. Maybe I'm not understanding the definition of engineering, but it seems exactly like what I do.

as a hobbyist programmer, I don't mind the general sense and feel of the editor, and I'm assuming (or suggesting) that the colors of the UI can be changed with some built-in options. I don't think I'd keep things transparent and quite so glowy, but it's certainly something to bear in mind. when there is some kind of build released for that, I'll give it a try. keep up the good work!

When I download a IDE, I don't want to spend the first hour changing the theme to something my eyes can bear. 'It's adjustable' isn't an excuse. It should be appealing on the first sight. That's how you get people to download your IDE.

[QUOTE=Asgard;35837904]When I download a IDE, I don't want to spend the first hour changing the theme to something my eyes can bear. 'It's adjustable' isn't an excuse. It should be appealing on the first sight. That's how you get people to download your IDE.[/QUOTE] Do you mean to imply that your idea of an appealing theme is the correct idea thereof?

[QUOTE=Rayjingstorm;35838196]Do you mean to imply that your idea of an appealing theme is the correct idea thereof?[/QUOTE] No. However, the ratings on my first post in this thread suggest that my opinion is generally accepted.

I think they'll deliver an alternative light theme at launch, if not, I'm sure we can come up with something.

[QUOTE=Asgard;35837904]When I download a IDE, I don't want to spend the first hour changing the theme to something my eyes can bear. 'It's adjustable' isn't an excuse. It should be appealing on the first sight. That's how you get people to download your IDE.[/QUOTE] Settings > Visual Settings > Theme > Some Theme If it takes an hour to do that then the theme that is set shouldnt be your main concern

[QUOTE=gparent;35837612]Eh, I don't think that's fair. Essentially your goal as a software 'engineer' (let's call it that for the sake of the argument) is pretty much the Wikipedia definition of it: In that sense, I think building software can definitely be called engineering. You are applying practical knowledge to design and build software/systems. Now, if we continue: Are we applying scientific principles? To be honest, I didn't study long enough to know if what we do is considered scientific. But essentially you define software and how it is supposed to act, in order for the software to work under specific conditions (and unexpected ones perhaps). This is what you do when writing software. You write a spec, you refine it, you write it, you test if it works, and if it does, you ship. Sure, you might have bugs, but other fields have that problem: bridges have been built that couldn't handle enough load, specifications are sometimes inaccurate leading to decisions being taken on the fly to deal with this, etc. Maybe I'm not understanding the definition of engineering, but it seems exactly like what I do.[/QUOTE] I've argued that the term 'software engineering' was a little misleading before, but that really isn't the point I was trying to make here. In fact, I'm not sure if I even still stand by that old argument. What I'm saying, simply, is that software development isn't like hardware development, and people should take full advantage of the flexibility afforded to them in software. Waterfall-like development processes are unavoidable in hardware because it is exceedingly difficult to go back and fix something once you've gone and set up a factory or, worse, once your product is actually out in consumer's hands. You can't 'patch' hardware like you can patch software. So you're forced into this rigid development process. But it's a terrible thing, and software engineers shouldn't opt to emulate it just because that's how it's done with hardware.

[QUOTE=ROBO_DONUT;35840794]But it's a terrible thing, and software engineers shouldn't opt to emulate it just because that's how it's done with hardware.[/QUOTE] You're right, I do not recommend waterfall approaches over agile ones these days, it makes no sense. I must've missed that in your post.

[QUOTE=gparent;35841069]You're right, I do not recommend waterfall approaches over agile ones these days, it makes no sense. I must've missed that in your post.[/QUOTE] Well, that's the thing with agile vs. waterfall strategies, it all comes down to what you're going after: progress or maintainability.

[QUOTE=voodooattack;35847087]Well, that's the thing with agile vs. waterfall strategies, it all comes down to what you're going after: progress or maintainability.[/QUOTE] waterfall has no benefits

[QUOTE=swift and shift;35847914]waterfall has no benefits[/QUOTE] At a certain stage, your code starts growing bigger than you. That's the point where you wish you had a waterfall to begin with.

[QUOTE=voodooattack;35847962]At a certain stage, your code starts growing bigger than you. That's the point where you wish you had a waterfall to begin with.[/QUOTE] even with a codebase of astronomical proportions, waterfall is never good

[QUOTE=voodooattack;35847962]At a certain stage, your code starts growing bigger than you. That's the point where you wish you had a waterfall to begin with.[/QUOTE] do you even understand agile?

[QUOTE=voodooattack;35847087]Well, that's the thing with agile vs. waterfall strategies, it all comes down to what you're going after: progress or maintainability.[/QUOTE] I don't mean "Agile" as in those idiots who think you need one hour meetings every day with performance reports. I just mean the typical approach where developers will incorporate more often user feedback rather than develop in closed walls for years and then coming out with a product that just doesn't meet the client's needs.

Ah, I get you now, I was thinking in marketing terms, apologies. I graduated with a major in Management & IA, so you can see where I'm coming from. :suicide:

You might want to change the Java text icon from JAV to JAVA. JAV is a commonly known acronym for Japanese Adult Video. Thought you should know.

[QUOTE=ditoway;35851873]You might want to change the Java text icon from JAV to JAVA. JAV is a commonly known acronym for Japanese Adult Video. Thought you should know.[/QUOTE] [img]http://www.facepunch.com/avatar/496751.png?garryis=awesome[/img]

New screenies on facebook: [IMG]https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/s720x720/540397_214444732005485_201113513338607_343355_849167230_n.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/s720x720/62612_214446228672002_201113513338607_343356_351388807_n.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/s720x720/536523_214444678672157_201113513338607_343354_1203820167_n.jpg[/IMG] I think a light theme won't be a problem now.

JPEG, truly the best image format for screenshots. The IDE is looking good apart from the first shot, which probably intends for your eyes to melt out of your face.