Do you want to permanently remove source control bindings from the project?



  • It defaults to 'yes' in VS2k5.  Since we work in a somewhat mixed environment, this question gets annoying since messing it up means finding all the changed files, opening and reverting them in the source control system I use (perforce, which makes finding unsanctioned changes on disk as painful as any tool can hope for).

    Maybe this is a weak WTF, but doesn't it seem a little drastic for a default option? Visual studio source control plugins (the ones I've used anyway), tend to be brittle and difficult to get working in the first place.



  • My admittedly limited experience of various versions of VS have always left me with a "gosh, people actually use this tripe?" feeling. I still can't get over the idiotic cursor movement in the editor.



  • I've learned to live with it in most ways and even like it in some respects.  Another WTF: when you zap to another file using 'Go To Definition', it only exposes that file at depth two in the 'Solution Explorer'.  If it's organized in a folder, you have to find it yourself. 



  • @asuffield said:

    My admittedly limited experience of various versions of VS have always left me with a "gosh, people actually use this tripe?" feeling. I still can't get over the idiotic cursor movement in the editor.

     

    Borland's is even worse, it places the cursor precisely where you click, so clicking past the end of the line doesn't place the cursor at the last symbol. I do this VERY often e.g. when inserting a new line between two commands. In Delphi I had to aim precisely where I wanted to type, and this behavior can't be changed.

    Visual Studio 2005's C# has tons of useful features, like showing where and which variable caused a null reference exception and offering an MSDN link about what the error means. Or not-annoying smart tags that offer to do automatic refactoring after a variable is renamed. Or an application-wide settings manager that doesn't write to the end user's Registry but stores all configuration settings in an XML file. Or writing "///" automatically creates a Javadoc-like comment for a function and all its parameters. Netbeans has some of these features, but it's a lot slower. I haven't used Eclipse for Java development, but their C++ tools love eating hunderds of megabytes of memory and the autocomplete often shows outdated functions that have been removed months ago.



  • @zlogic said:

    Visual Studio 2005's C# has tons of useful features, like showing where and which variable caused a null reference exception and offering an MSDN link about what the error means. Or not-annoying smart tags that offer to do automatic refactoring after a variable is renamed. Or an application-wide settings manager that doesn't write to the end user's Registry but stores all configuration settings in an XML file. Or writing "///" automatically creates a Javadoc-like comment for a function and all its parameters.

    As an emacs user, I am bemused as the idea that these things are worthy of note - there are "intelligent" editors which can't do them?



  • Personally I think that VS is a great editor. I have also had the permanently remove source control bindings problem and find it a pain. In fact, source control is one of the things I've hated in VS. It's always been painful. However, lately we've moved to TFS and it's been great. Hasn't skipped a beat. It integrates well, doesn't miss changes that have occurred in files and is generally a huge time save.

     As for the Go To Definition problem, I've never experienced it. I have a project with folders a number of levels deep and it works fine. The only time it doesn't work is if instead of adding a project reference, I add the outut DLL as a reference directly (I know this is a Kludge but there's a reason for it).

     I actually think that Microsoft's Dev Environments are one of the big reasons behind their successes. Things might be very difference if VB was never around!



  • I think I worked out the editor keys that annoy you. These annoy me anyway. You type something in and auto complete pops up. You want to go down to the next line but you can't becuase it scrolls through the auto complete list.



  • I've had nothing but pain with Visual Studio source control plugins, regardless of the source control software in question.  I think it's Visual Studio's source control hook API that's broken.  The best solution I've found is to avoid plugins altogether, just create a Visual Studio macro to checkout a file (since that's the only thing that it really saves time to do in the IDE), and for the rest use the source control's standalone client. 



  • It always kills me when someone prides themselves on using a masochistic, limited tool.

    Sure, you can get the job done with emacs. Or notepad for that matter.

    That is, if all you ever work on are tiny projects with few or no other contributors, no branches, no spikes. You know, simple, boring projects, the type where you have to CREATE a challenge for yourself to keep from a death by boredom??



  • @seaturnip said:

    I've had nothing but pain with Visual Studio source control plugins, regardless of the source control software in question.  I think it's Visual Studio's source control hook API that's broken.  The best solution I've found is to avoid plugins altogether, just create a Visual Studio macro to checkout a file (since that's the only thing that it really saves time to do in the IDE), and for the rest use the source control's standalone client. 

    Well, their real problem is that they're VSS-centric.  VSS is a horrible, horrible system (not that most source control isn't...) and it plugs directly into their API but other systems just don't work the same way.  Square peg, green hole.

    If you're using SVN, there's a VS plugin that acts as a front-end for Tortoise.  Forget what it's called, though.  Basically, when you right-click on an object in the Solution Explorer, you get a standard Tortiose menu.  I think it also does a status icon similar to Tortoise.



  • I'm still not convinced that emacs and vi aren't just running jokes that no one will let me in on. I've only used Visual Studio a couple times, but I like some of its features, like being able to exit the program without reading a tutorial.



  • I've used VS a few times, and I've found it to be pretty horrible. I still haven't found a way to make the compiler stop bugging me about including StdAfx.h. The worst part is that StdAfx.h causes an "unexpected endif" here (no other header file does this AFAIK):

    #ifdef _MSC_VER
    #include "StdAfx.h"
    #endif

    And heavens forbid you temporarily remove StdAfx.cpp from the project to troubleshoot linker errors. As far as I know, your project is then permanently broken.

    Also, the debugger that comes with it can't detect a segmentation fault if it got smacked in the face with one.

    Granted, it does have some features I miss in Dev-C++, such as go to declaration and definition. But all told, the disadvantages far outweigh the benefits.



  • @Cap'n Steve said:

    I'm still not convinced that emacs and vi aren't just running jokes that no one will let me in on. I've only used Visual Studio a couple times, but I like some of its features, like being able to exit the program without reading a tutorial.

    This sounds like a variation on the Blub effect...



  • @GalacticCowboy said:

    If you're using SVN, there's a VS plugin that acts as a front-end for Tortoise.  Forget what it's called, though.  Basically, when you right-click on an object in the Solution Explorer, you get a standard Tortiose menu.  I think it also does a status icon similar to Tortoise.

    You're referring to Ankh.



  • @Kyanar said:

    @GalacticCowboy said:

    If you're using SVN, there's a VS plugin that acts as a front-end for Tortoise.  Forget what it's called, though.  Basically, when you right-click on an object in the Solution Explorer, you get a standard Tortiose menu.  I think it also does a status icon similar to Tortoise.

    You're referring to Ankh.

    Actually, I'm not.  Ankh is a source control plugin that implements the source control API.  However, it royally blows - we never got it to successfully do anything other than corrupt some project files.  This is something different that doesn't even try to do the API.  It just brings Tortoise into the IDE.

    Quick google:  it's [url=http://www.visualsvn.com]VisualSVN[/url].



  • @asuffield said:

    @Cap'n Steve said:

    I'm still not convinced that emacs and vi aren't just running jokes that no one will let me in on. I've only used Visual Studio a couple times, but I like some of its features, like being able to exit the program without reading a tutorial.

    This sounds like a variation on the Blub effect...

    Yeah.

    What I find hard to understand is that Cap'n Steve, who is presumably a computing professional like most of us, complains about having to spend a few hours reading a tutorial to learn a tool that can be used daily for a decade or more afterward.  Even a small productivity improvement caused by a switch to a superior but cryptic editor should more than pay off the initial investment.



  • @asuffield said:

    @Cap'n Steve said:

    I'm still not convinced that emacs and vi aren't just running jokes that no one will let me in on. I've only used Visual Studio a couple times, but I like some of its features, like being able to exit the program without reading a tutorial.

    This sounds like a variation on the Blub effect...

    You either think there's something wrong with my car, or you mean the bulb effect, which doesn't really make sense in that context.

    @seaturnip said:

    Yeah.

    What I find hard to understand is that Cap'n Steve, who is presumably a computing professional like most of us, complains about having to spend a few hours reading a tutorial to learn a tool that can be used daily for a decade or more afterward.  Even a small productivity improvement caused by a switch to a superior but cryptic editor should more than pay off the initial investment.

    A couple of hours to use a text editor? You sound like SpectateSwamp.



  •  I have to use VS2005 to develop in C++ for work. It has the VisualAssistX add-in which adds a lot of syntax highlighting & code completion, refactoring  etc. I couldn't stand VS without it - definitely worth a try.



  • @Cap'n Steve said:

    A couple of hours to use a text editor? You sound like SpectateSwamp.
     

    Not really, SpectateSwamp can't teach you in a few hours unless you are at the SwampShack. I did not see the SwampShack mentioned here.

     



  • @Cap'n Steve said:

    @asuffield said:

    @Cap'n Steve said:

    I'm still not convinced that emacs and vi aren't just running jokes that no one will let me in on. I've only used Visual Studio a couple times, but I like some of its features, like being able to exit the program without reading a tutorial.

    This sounds like a variation on the Blub effect...

    You either think there's something wrong with my car, or you mean the bulb effect, which doesn't really make sense in that context.

    Blub 



  • Blub is a hypothetical programming language intended to represent an average programming language "[r]ight in the middle of the abstractness continuum. It is not the most powerful language, but it is more powerful than Cobol or machine language."

    If it can't be done in machine language, it's impossible.  How is that not powerful?



  • @GalacticCowboy said:

    Blub is a hypothetical programming language intended to represent an average programming language "[r]ight in the middle of the abstractness continuum. It is not the most powerful language, but it is more powerful than Cobol or machine language."

    If it can't be done in machine language, it's impossible.  How is that not powerful?

    Where on earth did you get "if it can't be done in machine code" from in that quote. The closest you could possibly get is "if it can't be done easily in machine code."

    Powerful there means 'easy to use to program,' not 'ability to do stuff, period.'

     As in 'C++ is more powerful than C' because C++ has classes.

    Classes are easy to use, but that doesn't stop you using OOP in C. It's just more effort (and possibly error prone.)

     

    It also doesn't stop you using OOP in machine code, if you're that masochistic of course.



  • @asuffield said:

    Blub

    Wow, that article sure is a complicated way of basically saying "people tend to like what they're familiar with."

    I guess I shouldn't be surprised you like emacs since you're such a fan of breaking usability conventions. I just can't figure out what is going through some of the programmer's minds when they make these decisions. I was forced to use vi when setting up my router and I thought I understood what the "delete" key was for, but apparently it's just an unusual spelling of "toggle case."



  • @Cap'n Steve said:

    I was forced to use vi when setting up my router and I thought I understood what the "delete" key was for, but apparently it's just an unusual spelling of "toggle case."

    Either your vi was elvis (bletch), or your terminal was misconfigured.



  •  @Cap'n Steve said:

    @asuffield said:
    Blub 

    Wow, that article sure is a complicated way of basically saying "people tend to like what they're familiar with."

     read the original essay to understand the full meaning of the blub paradox:

     

    http://www.paulgraham.com/avg.html 

     

     



  • @tster said:

    read the original essay to understand the full meaning of the blub paradox

    Which, incidentally, is not a paradox at all. 


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.