nobody uses aspectj?
Isn't anybody using AspectJ?
New jetbrains.intellij.aspectj group has very few messages....
--
pozdrawiam,
-
Michal Szklanowski
senior consultant
empolis Polska
tel. (0-22) 535-88-26
-
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Which is why I'd like to see AspectJ support become a plugin (or something I
can turn off) rather than clutter the IDE with stuff I don't use (yet
anyway).
"Michal Szklanowski" <mszklano@wp.pl> wrote in message
news:bf3nqg$esa$1@is.intellij.net...
>
>
>
>
>
>
+1 for the ability to remove aspect-j integration if desired, but not so
important. Very nice to have I would say.
Brad Lane wrote:
>>Isn't anybody using AspectJ?
>>New jetbrains.intellij.aspectj group has very few messages....
>>
>>
>>--
>>
>>pozdrawiam,
>>
>>----
>> Michal Szklanowski
>> senior consultant
>> empolis Polska
>> tel. (0-22) 535-88-26
>>----
>>
>>
Brad Lane wrote:
>Which is why I'd like to see AspectJ support become a plugin (or ..
>
I don't use EJB. I think I'm gonna a request to have JetBrains make it
removeable, because seing "EJB" in the UI hurts my eyes much more than
"666".
So, you genuinely think JetBrains should dedicate a developer's time and
resource on making AspectJ a plugin, hideable and removeable, for people
who don't want to see it?
You genuinely think this is a feature worth considering?
So, how many developer*days do you think this "feature" is worth
spending on?
1 day, 2, 1 week, or more?
Sorry for biting, but I'm getting fed up by this kind of thread, whether
it's about AspectJ, the uiDesigner, ... or whatever tool/feature you
don't use or need.
I think I prefer duplicates about "Can't save new project". At least, -
some - people apologize after posting the nth duplicate of this well
known bug.
Alain
+1 Alain, sometimes the same people who complain about AspectJ or the UI
not being a plugin are the same folks who think that it's a good idea to
add JPython or what ever else lamer idea along those lines.
I say you're not happy, don't use it... JetBrains would say otherwise
I'm sure, since they're much more forgiving and listen so well to us.
OTOH, they might just ignore it and keep doing what they're doing... ]]>
R
Alain Ravet wrote:
>> Which is why I'd like to see AspectJ support become a plugin (or ..
>>
As someone who has complained about both AspectJ and the GUIBuilder (calmly, rationally, and only once), I can think of half a dozen places where JetBrains could have expended their efforts which would have had wider usage, and more importantly would have pushed IDEA even farther along the path of being the ideal Java development (and re-development) environment. I'm thinking of stuff like dependency analysis and visualization tools, metrics, integrated code coverage and profiling tools, "Move Method", "Split Class", and more emphasis on static and dynamic code analysis. Things which would have made IDEA even more supple and responsive than it currently is, and would enhance the potential it has to be a tool that actually helps you produce better code. I don't care (much) about bloat. I do care about development resources being spent in ways that divert IDEA from it's core strengths (thus giving the competition time to catch up).
I understand the marketing needs behind both the AspectJ and GUIBuilder decisions. That doesn't mean that I can't regret them, or that there is no room for rational disagreement on the best course of IDEA development.
--Dave "But what do I know. I'm just a guy who paid $499" Griffith
Dave Griffith wrote:
> .. I can think of half a dozen places where JetBrains could have ..
> I understand the marketing needs behind both the AspectJ and
GUIBuilder decisions.
Well,.. it would be easy to agree on the principle of what you said, but
... no, I don't think so.
Step back a little, and you could see building a commercial software is
like "managing" a country.
You wish you could improve the road system, while giving more money to
teachers, nurses, and remove all suffering from the poor, and ..., but
money is a scare resource, and you have to make compromises.
Only one think is 100% guaranteed : whatever decision you make, they
will always be people who will thank you, while other will curse you.
> --Dave "But what do I know. I'm just a guy who paid $499" Griffith
Alain - I paid $199 cause I bought it during the Easter sale - Ravet
Well, if no one else will do it, I certainly will.
I could definitely make use of the things you mentioned. All of the big ticket items going in this time around are completely useless to me.
Hell, I finally bought IDEA not because of the big ticket item, but because of the small nuances and conveniences(though, I do want more...thanks to all of those plugin makers).
But, I guess a few get to voice their opinions and wants, and the rest of us should just shell out our money and shut the hell up, leaving these discussions to those who are apparently so much wiser than us. :)
Dave Griffith wrote:
> .. JetBrains could have ..like :
> dependency analysis,
> visualization tools,
> metrics, integrated code coverage and profiling tools, ..
All those tools already exist, and can be used next to IDEA, during a
working session.
AspectJ and UIDesigner, on the other hand, HAVE to be integrated with
IDEA (think of "Find Usage", and "refactor", eg.)
Alain
Okay, I don't like AspectJ integration in IDEA so I think I'll quit using
IDEA. I'm sure the JetBrains folks would love it if everyone did that.
Here's another idea (no pun intended) for you and the 'almighty' Alain:
don't read the posts if they bother you so much.
"Robert S. Sfeir" <sfcodewarrior@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:bf4agm$tk3$1@is.intellij.net...
>
>]]>
>
>
Heh that's exactly my point, you would NOT stop using IDEA because AspectJ or GUI are in it, and therefore it makes no sense to fill the forum day after day with whining about how come it's in there. Do a search if you'd like, find everything about removing GUI and Aspects, read it, and if you think not enough has been said, then post it... I think you'd find otherwise.
R
But, why should someones opinion be censored? Why can't they discuss it in an open forum. So what if it has been discussed 1 time or 100 times? Who gets to decide what is and is not discussed? Who gets to set the rules on how many times it can be discussed?
Personally, I view forums like a I view my TV: If I don't like what I am seeing, I can change the channel or switch it off.
And, your point is not 100% valid. Someone might not stop using it just because of Aspects or GUI. However, if the bugs they want fixed don't get fixed or the stuff that they want doesn't get added, and someone else(aka the competition) comes along with a product that has what they want, they can(and will) go to that other product. I certainly have not joined the Church of JetBrains and I keep my options open.
Likewise, if the stuff that is getting added jacks up the price, but adds no benefit to the customer, the customer is probably not going to buy it and just stick with what they have(or move to something else).
And, yes, it is all a fine line, a difficult choice, and such, but there it is.
Who knows, maybe on day, one of these discussions could take a different twist, and instead of resolving into a flame war over he said, she said, already said, shouldn't have said, wouldn't have said, would have been nice if it was said, etc., etc., something productive might come out of it. Maybe a positive solution. Nah...I guess not. :)
I wouldn't stop using idea because of any one integration but this is my concern.
Several years ago jbuilder was very cool, but as it grew it got fatter and fatter. Now that is has almost every feature under the sun it is so slow that I started looking for something better, that was idea.
My concern is that as idea grows, if there is no way to pick and choose which features you want and don't want that idea will be as bad as jbuilder.
On the other hand if there is ways to do custom installs or ways of removing features you don't use then the app will stay customized for each user and fast.
I'm really not trying to get into the argument about aspects, but if you have ever worked for a long time on the same app you know that this is the natural cycle of software.
+1 zmbs
I feel the same way. When I look at the Aurora feature list (http://www.intellij.net/eap/products/idea/aurora.jsp), there is very little that I find useful to me. Only the new CVS integration and Macros recording/playing. Jetbrains doesn't seem to have much planned for the core Editor/Debugger/CodeNavigation.
I'm getting much more pop from these plugins people have released the past several months. I am constantly using Timur's CamelPlugin and ReformatPlugin, and the Intention plugins are useful to me, and of course my HungryBackSpace plugin!
I feel like tracker requests in the Core Editor / Debugger / Navigation should be given higher priority since these have potential to be used by more people and people that do use them tend to use them constantly.
Some examples: auto-insert/auto-remove imports, reorder fields and methods in class according to user-defeined template, word completion based on strings in edited buffers when basic completion returns nothing; There are lots and lots of great ideas in the tracker...
Considering the comparatively small commercial uptake of AspectJ, it's pretty hard to justify "have to be integrated". The demand may someday be there, but it's just not yet, as near as I can tell. It's a preemptive move on JetBrains part, and certainly not driven by current demand. It only "has to be integrated" if anyone were using it, and as yet, no one much is. Great potential, surely, but it's going to be a long time before it sees much commercial use.
The tools I listed I specifically chose because they would be so much more valuable integrated than stand-alone. Consider, there currently exist standalone tools for "Find Usage" and various refactorings. No one much cares about them, because the hassle to fire them up outweighs the benefit. Integrated, the whole is much greater than the sum of the parts. Imagine a dependency analysis tool operating off of the PSI, with complex visualization as easy to fire off as an Ant build is today. That's something that would be, to my mind, much more in tune with IDEA's core strengths, and far more valuable than either AspectJ or a Swing UI builder.
+1
One of the main things that got me started using IDEA (and then having the two
companies I've worked for since then purchase multiple license) was the
quick-and-easy refactorings. While I like the recent builds, I haven't seen a
new refactoring in quite sometime. In fact, there are local variable-level
refactorings that would save me time and reduce errors, such as Change Variable
Type (tracker Id 3361), or Move Declaration To Outer Scope (ID 5973).
There's also probably one of the most time-consuming (in hundreds of 15-30
seconds blocks per day): trying to find the right tab that has a file I'm
looking for, made much more difficult because the names aren't sorted (see ID
2868). And one of the few things I miss from Eclipse: Error Highlighting on
the tabs (see 4149 in tracker -- rated as Priority: High w/150 votes).
This core stuff would be more difficult for plugins (I'm guessing -- someone
please prove me wrong), so I'd like to see some more focus on these types of
improvements.
;ted
"Alex" <no_mail@jetbrains.com> wrote in message
news:16527544.1058404160530.JavaMail.itn@is.intellij.net...
>
(http://www.intellij.net/eap/products/idea/aurora.jsp), there is very little
that I find useful to me. Only the new CVS integration and Macros
recording/playing. Jetbrains doesn't seem to have much planned for the core
Editor/Debugger/CodeNavigation.
>
several months. I am constantly using Timur's CamelPlugin and ReformatPlugin,
and the Intention plugins are useful to me, and of course my HungryBackSpace
plugin!
>
should be given higher priority since these have potential to be used by more
people and people that do use them tend to use them constantly.
>
class according to user-defeined template, word completion based on strings in
edited buffers when basic completion returns nothing; There are lots and lots
of great ideas in the tracker...
>
+1.5 :)
I agree.
Some of the existing refactoring could even be improved.
For example, the Introduce Constant. IRC, in Eclipse, you can preview the change and unselect lines where you don't want the constant introduced.
There have been times when I have used Introduce Constant in IDEA and then had to go back and manual change the lines where I wanted the constant used.
Anything to help interpret code, working through nasty inherited(from another project/program) code, or get a better understanding of the code is a definite plus.
And, I feel you pain on the tabs. I've tried to use the Project view, but that sends the cursor back to the top of the file(even if it is already open); plus, for large projects that can even be cumbersome. We need sorting, drag and drop, or something to help keep those little blighters organized.
I guess one of the things that I have to wonder about is why so many big ticket items at one time. That to me(admittely without really knowing internals of IDEA) just adds a lot of complexity and spreads the resources.
Why not work on one major item at a time, do it well, release it, and move on. I guess Generics and Aspects are the latest buzz words, so I can see wanting to get them all in from a marketing point of view.
Seems like somwhere there could be some sort of happy middle ground.
>Personally, I view forums like a I view my TV: If
>I don't like what I am seeing, I can change the
>channel or switch it off.
Exactly. I don't feel a need to chastise people for posting in a discussion forum what some people have discussed before, I just read something else.
>Likewise, if the stuff that is getting added jacks
>up the price, but adds no benefit to the customer,
This is what concerns me a little too. I like the idea of being able to strip out EJB, Web App, Aspects, Whatever support for maybe a slightly cheaper license.
Anyway, the point I actually wanted to make was that I don't think the original poster in this thread was criticising AspectJ in IDEA, he was just highlighting the fact that there are only TWO messages currently posted in that forum and was wondering where are all the vociferous AspectJ users are.
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 17:19:40 -0100, Alain Ravet
<alain.ravet.list@wanadoo.be> wrote:
>
>> Which is why I'd like to see AspectJ support become a plugin (or ..
>>
>
>
>
In past proyect i used EJB quite a lot, in the present proyect i don't use
it.
The performance of IDEA with the EJB support activated is quite lower than
without it. When we ask for the Aspectj/UI designer to be a
plugin/disableable feature we mean that at least it doesn't use any
resource if you aren't using it as
the EJB/Web support.
--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
seeing, I can change the channel or switch it off.
Lucky you! We at JetBrains just can't switch it off. Sometimes its getting
on my nerves I am to read all this stuff instead of developing.
--
Best regards,
Maxim Shafirov
JetBrains, Inc / IntelliJ Software
http://www.intellij.com
"Develop with pleasure!"
What you you think about creating moderated forums. I bet you could get a couple of us to moderate the forums for you.
You could create a moderated forum that jetbrains reads and another unmoderated forum for general questions that the community could answer
I would like to use aspect support (and of course report bugs) but currently the integration is so limited that this is not possible. not even the complete lang (ver. 1.1) is supported, not to mention compilation. if jetbrains want feedback they would have pushed aspect support far more further.
i think they do one at a time ant currently the ui stuff and cvs is on the top of their list.
Thank you, and the reason why I keep saying we need to get back to
useful conversations, and not waste the bandwidth of JetBrains people.
Sometimes people on here think this is their dad's forum or something.
There are people on the other side of this who have to read every post
(including this one unfortunately). So the point is they heard, they're
gonna do what they think is right, read the other posts to make you feel
better that everything's been said already, and let the JetBrains people
get back to writing code and stabilizing things for us, so we stop
whining about the quality of the EAPs.
R
Maxim Shafirov wrote:
>>Personally, I view forums like a I view my TV: If I don't like what I am
Yep, I hate those pesky paying customers. Next thing you know, people will want software that is bug free and works completely as advertised(boy is MS is for a lot of trouble when that happens). :)
(yes, that is a joke)
Anyway, just because someone offers an alternative point of view or even a critisism doesn't mean that they are insulting or degrading the product or company.
Sometimes, an alternative point of view can even be helpful, if you are open to it.
Recently, I added some small features to a software package I support. Nothing major, just some attempts to beautify the reports generated by the application. Well, the customers didn't like it; it was uneeded, waste ink when you did screen prints, etc. Well, instead of throwing a fit about it, I listened to what they had to say and realized that I was actually missing a feature, which I prompty added(after removing the other feature); now it is a fairly popular feature(popular enough that I had to expand it recently).
Anyway, I think IDEA is a very good product, good enough that I am willing to spend my time voicing my opinion and offering my point of view. Apparently, it is not wanted or needed.
But I can take a hint. Speaking of which, I have to check my in boxes; those pesky customers of mine are probably leaving me messages about the application I support, as we speak.
Thanks for you time.
Go vote for:
Add "Preview changes" to the "Introduce Constant" refactoring
http://www.intellij.net/tracker/idea/viewSCR?publicId=4518
If someone of you here cannot live with AspectJ, GUI designer, EJB support or whatever else not being a plugin - then just cast your vote for:
"Modularization of IDEA"
http://www.intellij.net/tracker/idea/viewSCR?publicId=8134
Please, express your interest through voting for a concrete feature request.
Right on, Dave. I completely agree: Loose support for aspects and the GUI builder, and focus on the core values - coding!
matt
Actually, no. You're missing the point. EJB integration is something that can be turned off, when you have it off, you see pretty much no mention of it anywhere outside of project properties. AspectJ on the other hand is being rammed down your throat every right you right click on an editor window, with that stupid pointcut nonsense.
The UIDesigner doesn't bother me, it's a purely commercial move designed to cater for the masses, fine. It's also not in my face as I go about my day unless I specifically choose to use it (which I will, right after I become a friendly, kind, cheerful, and considerate poster proclaiming love for all)
Hani Suleiman wrote:
>AspectJ .. is being rammed down your throat every right you right click on an editor window
>
If the main problem is the visual clutter and inappropriate suggestions,
then a simple
"Hide AspectJ related stuff when there is no aspect in the project"
RFE should be the first step.
I don't remember seeing any. (I could be wrong)
Alain
Although I personally welcome the inclusion of Aspects, I think there is a
valid point in what you're saying. We should be able to turn off features
that we aren't using in a particular project so they don't get in our way.
This is already possible with EJB and Web App support; it should also extend
to Aspect support and, more generally, all plugins. A good example is the
SQL Query plugin: on projects where I use a database (i.e. pretty much all
work ones) it's very useful; on other projects (i.e. my experiments at
home), it just clutters up the UI. It would be great to be able to
selectively enable / disable them on a per project basis. Does anyone know
if there is an SCR for this yet?
Vil.
Hani Suleiman wrote:
--
Vilya Harvey
vilya.harvey@digitalsteps.com / digital steps /
(W) +44 (0)1483 469 480
(M) +44 (0)7816 678 457 http://www.digitalsteps.com/
DisclaimerThis e-mail and any attachments may be confidential and/or legally
privileged. If you have received this email and you are not a named
addressee, please inform the sender at Digital Steps Ltd by phone on
+44 (0)1483 469 480 or by reply email and then delete the email from
your system. If you are not a named addressee you must not use,
disclose, distribute, copy, print or rely on this email. Although
Digital Steps Ltd routinely screens for viruses, addressees should
check this email and any attachments for viruses. Digital Steps Ltd
makes no representation or warranty as to the absence of viruses in this
email or any attachments.
A monitored, censored forum? This is a solution that is worse than the (percieved) problem!