Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm new to emacs and I find it hard to make decisions on which extension to choose. Too many choices I say. The same pattern is true when I first started to use linux (choosing a distro, choosing packages to install, etc.)
I'm now faced with the dilemma of choosing between autocomplete and company. Both are emacs extensions that provide completion mechanisms for emacs. I may decide to use autocomplete because I think it's much more mature, and because of AutoJavaComplete which requires autocomplete. However, company mode also seems to be good, and some users report that it's much better than autocomplete. It lacks documentation though, which I rather find daunting.
Basically, I just want "intellisensy" completion when writing code. Which among the two is a better choice for this?
The latest company-mode release is 12 hours old as I'm writing this. Recent work focused on bugfixing, as well as some nice new features.
I encourage you to try it, I think it provides better user experience than auto-complete.
You can feed company backends to auto-complete, and the compatibility is probably possible in the reverse direction too - so your choice may not be too critical.
What comes out of discussions at the emacs wiki is that CompanyMode is older, and there is at least one mention of bugs in favor of auto-complete. Indeed, it seems auto-conplete is what the cool kids are using these days, and repository on github shows active development. The latest version of company, on the other hand, is nearly 11 months old.
Related
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 1 year ago.
Improve this question
I just graduated and started my career as a junior software engineer. The one thing I am struggling with right now is not knowing when to stop doing something from scratch.
Last week I was told to simulate a warehouse environment and tell my boss what sorts of layout should be optimal. I spent days trying to build that in Simpy, Netlogo, Google OR tools. Even though I was aware there's a software tool called AnyLogic for doing all this for you, I just didn't use it.
After spending almost two weeks with partial development my boss wasn't satisfied with my work. And now I'm watching AnyLogic tutorials. I am not sure whether I should keep working on improving my partial work or switch to AnyLogic and save time.
I would highly appreciate if you give me some suggestions to know when to go for the built in stuff and when not to. I know it sounds very simple but it's actually not. Requirement analysis of a project is very tough.
Thank you. :D
If future flexibility (upgrading, knowing how it works, etc.) of doing it from scratch benefits you more than using a prebuilt system saves you time, do it from scratch. Otherwise it's not worth it. Time is money, and you can't get time back.
As long as you understand what exactly it is that you are doing with a prebuilt system then there is no issue in using it. When I code, am I doing something wrong by using VSCode instead of writing my own text editor? No, I know what a text editor does and how it does it.
When I use VSCode, am I doing something wrong by running it in Microsoft Windows or Linux, and not custom developing my own operating system? No, because I know what an operating system does.
The flexibility of writing my own software to do these tasks does not outweigh the time saved by using a prebuilt solution and therefore I will end up being more productive, and probably make more money in the end, by using them.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
Yes, while i'm working on node.js, i still love perl, :)
The old web product is based on old perl CGI, i'm looking to the simplest way to fix XSS/Sql injection/etc. web security holes, within a week including testing, :(
So for
Catalyst
Dancer
Mason
Maypole
Mojolicious
which one should i use in the ARM platform ?
Thank you !
You have fallen foul of the primarily opinion-based off-topic categorisation, and your question will probably be closed very soon. However I think it's worth offering a few guidelines here
First of all you should absorb what is written in CGI::Alternatives as it is a reasonable summary of the subject
Next you should separate the HTML generation functionality of your existing CGI code from the interface itself, and consider replacements for each of them separately. If you were to use HTML::Tiny together with CGI::Simple then your code would have to change very little and you would have achieved better partitioning of functionality
Ideally you will move on to one of the many templating systems such as Template Toolkit, together with one of the frameworks, which is the topic of your question. In the end you will need to do a lot of research and many trials to discover how well each framework fits your requirement, in terms of both the feature list and the convenience and clarity of the API
All I can do here is say that I am very fond of the Mojolicious suite and suggest that it may be a good starting point. The API focuses on command chaining in a way similar to Ruby, and there is a Mojolicious::Plugin::CGI accessory which will allow you to execute CGI scripts unchanged during your migration
Note however that all of the frameworks that you mention, as well as several others, will have their proponents. That is why you must make the selection yourself, as such recommendations will be influenced primarily by familiarity, and without your own knowledge of the requirements of your project
Unfortunately I cannot speak to the security issues of the various options, but I hope that has helped a little
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 2 years ago.
Improve this question
I am contemplating writing a useful article in a field of my interest. There are many others (about 10-15) people interested in peer reviewing and collaborating on the same. I am not a prolific programmer, but I understand how GitHub works for version control.
Can I use it for writing a 4-5 page collaborative article (version control is very important part) or do you think a better alternative exists?
You certainly could, but I don't know if it's the best choice. A couple of questions come to mind. Is this a text-based document format or are you planning on doing your writing in something like MS Word? If the former then I think it could work well. If the latter I would say it may be less effective.
What about your other collaborators? Are they savvy enough to use a DVCS? That would have some influence as well. I don't know how strongly you need the document versioned, but I could see using git as overkill.
I've found that using Google Docs works well and has a revision history, although it's obviously not as robust as would be found in a VCS.
I think it would work great. The Ruby on Rails guides are on a publicly write/readable repository at GitHub, for instance. You get get Git things for free (branches, blame, general version control features), plus you'll have a reliable backup and publishing mechanism if you like.
Given that the contributers are computer literate enough to successfully use Git, that is.
If you write it in Markdown, you can throw inline HTML into it (just by itself like you can do on Stack Overflow). Easy to write, easy to style, etc.
You can, but on the other hand:
Most wikis allow rich-content pages easyly, are ready for collaborative editing and have versioning and version-management embedded in the core.
One promissing recent development is penflip (https://www.penflip.com/) which was created with the idea of being a "github for text".
Check this article to learn about the author's ideas http://madebyloren.com/github-for-writers
Consider using google docs. They have some kind of version control. And it is much more suitable for this kind of work.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I was wondering how people think about using productivity tools like Coderush or Resharper in live demos. Is it a don't and should someone only use the most default settings of the IDE? Or is it ok to speed things up a little during the demo? Also, should you explain you are using this tool during the demo?
I've seen a lot of presentations where people use these tools and personally I don't mind.
Make sure you tell people that are going to be using the tool and then announce the action that you are about to take. e.g. "I'll use Resharper to extract this method into the Foo class"
It really depends on what you want to demonstrate. This kind of productivity tool are usefull even for demos in order to avoid loosing time on basic technical problems. You may also take advantages of such demos to introduce the features of these tools...
I tend to use DevExpress Refactor! Pro, and GhostDoc, when I do code-related presentations. I try to make sure the audience knows what I'm doing by saying out loud what I'm going to do, but I have also built my own custom tool for this, which you can find a beta of here: LVK.ScreenKeys.
Basically the tool will pop up, in the upper right corner of the screen, yellow tooltip/toast-like windows showing the key stroke/sequence I invoked, and also a textual description of what it means, depending on the software it was invoked in.
Before I started using such a tool, I invariably had questions like "what did you do now", and if you don't want to use such a tool (there are others besides mine), I would consider not using more than a few functions of such tools.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I currently use Kile to edit LaTeX documents. I don't like kile for a couple of reasons so I was thinking of trying to learn how to use texmacs. I have been through a tutorial for emacs which I am now getting to grips with. The documentation for texmacs and auctex are pretty weak in terms of explaining how to install and how to use those things. A quick google search didn't show up any friendly "how-to"s on this topic. Are there any resources you can direct me to?
I'm a bit puzzled by your question. I use Emacs+Auctex on Windows, Linux and OS X machines and have never had any problem installing them. I'd suggest heading to http://www.gnu.org/software/auctex/ and following the instructions. If you have any more specific questions post again.
sorry I can't help you with TeXmacs, I just wanted to note that this program isn't under active development for quite some time now. If you look at the homepage the copyright notice is until year 2003!
If you are looking for a more GUI oriented LaTeX editor I can recommend LyX. Emacs+AucTeX is of course wonderful, but it has a certain learning curve.
However if you plan to learn Emacs or are using it already, than you should definitely go for it!