Curiosity

Hi,

It's just curiosity. What do you use in IntelliJ IDEA development?
IntelliJ IDEA itself? :S What else?

Thanks,

Franklin.

20 comments
Comment actions Permalink

Hi,

IntelliJ IDEA developed by IntelliJ IDEA

Franklin wrote:

Hi,

It's just curiosity. What do you use in IntelliJ IDEA development?
IntelliJ IDEA itself? :S What else?

Thanks,

Franklin.

0
Comment actions Permalink

Franklin wrote:

Hi,

It's just curiosity. What do you use in IntelliJ IDEA development?
IntelliJ IDEA itself? :S What else?

Thanks,

Franklin.


LOL, no, we use some other lame IDE. We only WISH we could use IDEA.
Sigh, the shoemaker's children are always barefoot.

--
Rob Harwood
Software Developer
JetBrains Inc.
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"

0
Comment actions Permalink

Well... it's like everybody says (at least in Brazil): curiosity killed
the cat.

Franklin.

Rob Harwood (JetBrains) wrote:

Franklin wrote:

>> Hi,
>>
>> It's just curiosity. What do you use in IntelliJ IDEA development?
>> IntelliJ IDEA itself? :S What else?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Franklin.


LOL, no, we use some other lame IDE. We only WISH we could use IDEA.
Sigh, the shoemaker's children are always barefoot.

0
Comment actions Permalink

Franklin wrote:

Well... it's like everybody says (at least in Brazil): curiosity killed
the cat.

Franklin.


I hope I didn't sound rude. It was just funny to me.

--
Rob Harwood
Software Developer
JetBrains Inc.
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"

0
Comment actions Permalink

No, you didn't. I was just curious about that.

A friend of mine used to ask me how the really first compiler had been
created. I used to answer that someone binary wrote a .com (good MS-DOS
time) file by hand. So, I was curious to know what you guys use to
develop IDEA.

In fact, it become more interesting if you think about how you debug it.
Do you open the, let's say, idea-3177.ipr file with IDEA-3144 and run it
in debug mode? :S :)

Cheers,

Franklin.

Rob Harwood (JetBrains) wrote:

Franklin wrote:

>> Well... it's like everybody says (at least in Brazil): curiosity
>> killed the cat.
>>
>> Franklin.


I hope I didn't sound rude. It was just funny to me.

0
Comment actions Permalink


>Do you open the, let's say, idea-3177.ipr file with >IDEA-3144 and run it
>in debug mode?

I'm guessing they debug a given version by running it in debug mode within itself. There's no reason to use a previous rev unless they are debugging the debugger (or their current rev is simply unusable).

--Dave Griffith

0
Comment actions Permalink

In fact, it become more interesting if you think about how you debug
it. Do you open the, let's say, idea-3177.ipr file with IDEA-3144 and
run it in debug mode? :S :)


We have a simplified build procesdure for ourselves. No installer, no scrambling
etc. Just plain compile by IDEA and simple .sh or .bat file that zips classes
into jars which replace once from a real build. All takes about 5 mins (or
up to 20 in worst case of full rebuild).

Thus developers upgrade to a fresh "build" at least daily.


0
Comment actions Permalink

I was curious to know what you guys use to
develop IDEA.


IntelliJ IDEA was born from a couple of JBuilder plugins that added nice refactoring and code navigation features to the said IDE. That was back in 2000, and we knew them as IntelliJ Renamer and IntelliJ CodeSearch.

Later, JetBrains started developing IntelliJ IDEA -- so I think it's fair to assume they used JBuilder to develop the first version of IDEA, which came out in early 2001. From that on, JBuilder is history, and welcome IntelliJ IDEA :)

Is that what you were looking for, Franklin?

Note: unfortunately I'm not involved in the IDEA community for so long. I first joined EAP in Aug, 2002, during the Aurora (IDEA 3.0) cycle. Most of the above info was gathered from old forum posts, and the info available on JetBrains website.

0
Comment actions Permalink

And just to correct myself: IDEA 3.0 was Ariadna, Aurora was 4.0 ^^ your home assignemnt is find out the common pattern in IDEA codenames :P

0
Comment actions Permalink

Marcus Brito wrote:

.. the first version of IDEA, which came out in early 2001.



I remember being very happy with the first version, so small, so light,
so much more useful than the bloated JBuilder of the time.
Today, people complain because css support is not as good as java support.


I wish they would recompile those old versions for the new JDKs, and
give them free to the world. After all, "Rename", "Extract method",
"Introduce variable" and "Move" do 90% of the job, don't they?


Alain

0
Comment actions Permalink

Dave Griffith wrote:

>>Do you open the, let's say, idea-3177.ipr file with >IDEA-3144 and run it
>>in debug mode?


I'm guessing they debug a given version by running it in debug mode within itself. There's no reason to use a previous rev unless they are debugging the debugger (or their current rev is simply unusable).

--Dave Griffith

OK, now that really hurts my brain :)

How do you debug the debugger? Run IntelliJ within IntelliJ and run
another application in it? Man, that can be recursive forever :)

0
Comment actions Permalink

Alain Ravet wrote:

Marcus Brito wrote:

>> .. the first version of IDEA, which came out in early 2001.



I remember being very happy with the first version, so small, so light,
so much more useful than the bloated JBuilder of the time.
Today, people complain because css support is not as good as java support.


I wish they would recompile those old versions for the new JDKs, and
give them free to the world. After all, "Rename", "Extract method",
"Introduce variable" and "Move" do 90% of the job, don't they?


Alain

+1

0
Comment actions Permalink


>I wish they would recompile those old versions for the new >JDKs, and give them free to the world. After all, "Rename", >"Extract method", "Introduce variable" and "Move" do 90% of >the job, don't they?

I'd add "Inline" to get up to 90%, and "Extract Interface" and "Change Signature" bring it up into the 95% range. I have to say though, that going back to the pre-Ariadna analysis era would be pretty jarring. Great weapons need great sensors.

We are so spoiled.

--Dave

0
Comment actions Permalink


>How do you debug the debugger?

System.out.println and a lot of coffee.

--Dave Griffith

0
Comment actions Permalink

Dave Griffith wrote:
>>I wish they would recompile those old versions for the new >JDKs, and give them free to the world. After all, "Rename", >"Extract method", "Introduce variable" and "Move" do 90% of >the job, don't they?


I'd add "Inline" to get up to 90%, and "Extract Interface" and "Change Signature" bring it up into the 95% range. I have to say though, that going back to the pre-Ariadna analysis era would be pretty jarring. Great weapons need great sensors.

We are so spoiled.

--Dave

May be this semi humoristic request really reflects a need to have IDEA
more modularized and easily activate / disable plug-ins / functional
areas? For example, I never use the Commander. Why? May be I don't need
it, may be I'm as stupid as a shoe. The fact remains that it is loaded
beyond my control. I am sure no one uses every specialized feature in
IntelliJ nowadays, as it is by far not the IDE that has only what
everyone uses.
At this point, if you use every single feature in IntelliJ you are
probably not very productive (e.g. 3 kinds of version control, for example).

If IDEA is modularized and one can enable/disable features easily, then
we can go back to the lean and mean coding machine we were used to.

Combine that with a little component that looks at what the user does
and suggests enabling a component (e.g. the user has XML support turned
off, but opens an XML file), and you have a winner IMHO.

Amnon

0
Comment actions Permalink

That's a good IDEA! Maybe some components depends on other components
and we wouldn't be able to disable those other depends on, or all
dependencies would be also disabled.

Anyway, +10! :)

Franklin.

Amnon I. Govrin wrote:

Dave Griffith wrote:

>>> I wish they would recompile those old versions for the new >JDKs, and
>>> give them free to the world. After all, "Rename", >"Extract method",
>>> "Introduce variable" and "Move" do 90% of >the job, don't they?
>>
>>
>>
>> I'd add "Inline" to get up to 90%, and "Extract Interface" and "Change
>> Signature" bring it up into the 95% range. I have to say though, that
>> going back to the pre-Ariadna analysis era would be pretty jarring.
>> Great weapons need great sensors.
>>
>> We are so spoiled.
>>
>> --Dave


May be this semi humoristic request really reflects a need to have IDEA
more modularized and easily activate / disable plug-ins / functional
areas? For example, I never use the Commander. Why? May be I don't need
it, may be I'm as stupid as a shoe. The fact remains that it is loaded
beyond my control. I am sure no one uses every specialized feature in
IntelliJ nowadays, as it is by far not the IDE that has only what
everyone uses.
At this point, if you use every single feature in IntelliJ you are
probably not very productive (e.g. 3 kinds of version control, for
example).

If IDEA is modularized and one can enable/disable features easily, then
we can go back to the lean and mean coding machine we were used to.

Combine that with a little component that looks at what the user does
and suggests enabling a component (e.g. the user has XML support turned
off, but opens an XML file), and you have a winner IMHO.

Amnon

0
Comment actions Permalink

Dave Griffith wrote:

>>I wish they would recompile those old versions for the new >JDKs, and give them free to the world. After all, "Rename", >"Extract method", "Introduce variable" and "Move" do 90% of >the job, don't they?
>>
>>
>I'd add "Inline" to get up to 90%, and "Extract Interface" and "Change Signature" bring it up into the 95% range.
>

That would make for a great free "community edition".

I have to say though, that going back to the pre-Ariadna analysis era would be pretty jarring. Great weapons need great sensors.

>We are so spoiled.

>

"Back to the basics": it could be enlighting.


Alain

0
Comment actions Permalink

I'm not sure how serious you are in saying that. I'd like to add that, provided that IDEA startup is still atleast semi-snappy, and that using it feels/is fast, I don't want to be bothered with a zillion load-configuration settings. The AppleWay(tm). Just provide useful configurability, I don't want anything else. Provide a fast, usable and pretty default. After all, the task is to Use IDEA, not Configure IDEA. Configuring tools use linux.

0
Comment actions Permalink

Amnon I. Govrin wrote:

How do you debug the debugger? Run IntelliJ within IntelliJ and run
another application in it? Man, that can be recursive forever :)


That's easy. You run IDEA in debug mode from within IDEA. Then you run
IDEA in debug mode from within the IDEA that is in debug mode in the
original IDEA. This way, you can actually get twice the debugging done! ;)

--
Rob Harwood
Software Developer
JetBrains Inc.
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"

0
Comment actions Permalink

Rob Harwood (JetBrains) wrote:

Amnon I. Govrin wrote:

>> How do you debug the debugger? Run IntelliJ within IntelliJ and run
>> another application in it? Man, that can be recursive forever :)


That's easy. You run IDEA in debug mode from within IDEA. Then you run
IDEA in debug mode from within the IDEA that is in debug mode in the
original IDEA. This way, you can actually get twice the debugging done! ;)

Thanks for the explanation, Rob, I think I need to lie down now :)

0

Please sign in to leave a comment.