On Thursday 22 November 2007 12:15:24 pm Mike Miller wrote: > On Wed, 21 Nov 2007, Robert De Mars wrote: > > Forgive me if this is off topic, but I was curious about php editors. > > I have just recently started coding PHP, and I have not found an editor > > I like yet. I started simply using VIM (elvis), and have played with > > KDE's Quanta (but this seems to crash often for me). I was curious what > > other php programmers like to use. > > This is an interesting issue. I like to use Emacs, and when I get into > coding something like RoR or C or HTML, I'll make sure I have the proper > Emacs mode for that language and any other neat add-ons that might be out > there. This has worked well enough for me. Here's info on PHP on emacs: > > http://www.google.com/search?q=emacs+php > > But I have a colleague who is a professional coder and his approach is to > go to an entirely different package for different kinds of files. He'll > use Textmate (Mac only) for RoR and he'll use NetBeans for Java, etc. I > want to use Linux, and I don't have a Mac, but he will keep the code on a > Linux machine and edit it remotely using subversion to checkout some code, > edit it locally and commit changes back to the remote subversion Db. > That's an interesting approach, and I guess it works well as long as both > machines and the network are all up. > > When I told him that I thought it might be better just to use Emacs, which > is super portable and has modes for everything, he thought maybe I was > right. But then again, I don't do all that much coding myself (not > compared to pros) so it doesn't matter that much what I do, but I do hire > people and I usually encourage them to use emacs with appropriate modes. > > Mike > Hopefully no one will ever report you to OSHA for encouraging ergonomically unsafe work habits. ;) The reason that different editors exist of course, is that different people are productive in different ways. I for example am probably the perfect example of the man with one gun. I use vi/nvi/vim for all of my editing needs, and have done so for 15 odd years. In all of my UNIX travels I've run in to one box where one of those commands didn't start an editor....(and yes, it was a linux box ;) Over the years I've gone from being mainly an admin to mainly a programmer, although there's always been overlap...and my programming has wandered from language to language, but I've never run in to a scenario where I felt the efficiency benefits of an IDE would overcome the loss in efficiency I'd run in to by not using vi....especially since I've noticed that most IDEs tend to strongly support one language, and switching languages oftentimes means finding a new IDE as well. Where this starts to get dangerous of course is when you start to make assumptions about efficiency and productivity. For instance, it's my natural reaction, based on my experience, to say someone who learns new tools all the time never really gets to be proficient or efficient with them, or never recoups their lost time in learning the tool by using it long enough to enjoy the increased productivity it gave them. On the other hand someone else might say they can't see how *I* can be productive coding in vim....something that would be quickly cleared up by a couple of minutes in a shared screen session. In all reality, my personality and learning type strongly favors single tools...I do what I do because it works best for me, and to blindly assume that what I do works best for anyone else can sometimes be foolish.....of course on the other hand, I have to balance this against the fact that I am incredibly productive, and I've watched people try to accomplish simple admin tasks in nano and been aghast at how long it takes them to do things.... Oh, and speaking of editors.....I've always thought it would be fun to have an editor wars competition....given a common set of editing tasks and the environment of your choice, who can complete them first. Maybe would make an interesting joint TCBUG/TCLUG meeting of sorts.... -- Thanks, Josh Paetzel PGP: 8A48 EF36 5E9F 4EDA 5A8C 11B4 26F9 01F1 27AF AECB -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 187 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part. Url : http://mailman.mn-linux.org/pipermail/tclug-list/attachments/20071123/b0a47d36/attachment.pgp