How to turn off smooth scrolling...

- Navigate to ~/.IntellijIdea/config/options
- Edit editor.xml
- set ]]>

For me this works. I guess Jetbrainers will allow to toggle
this option via GUI in a couple of builds.


14 comments
Comment actions Permalink

Sorry, I know this may sound harsh...
I don't know how much time was spent getting animated scrolling to work,
but I cannot fathom how this is such a useful feature that it needed to be added
at this point.

Michal Szklanowski wrote:

- Navigate to ~/.IntellijIdea/config/options
- Edit editor.xml
- set <option name="IS_ANIMATED_SCROLLING" value="false" />

For me this works. I guess Jetbrainers will allow to toggle
this option via GUI in a couple of builds.


--

Erb

==============================================================
"Most of you are familiar with the virtues of a programmer.
There are three, of course: laziness, impatience, and hubris."
- Larry Wall
==============================================================

0
Comment actions Permalink

Well, I like it for somethings, and for others, I don't.

Like it for Page Up and Down. Also like it for find results that are not in the viewable area.

If there were/is a page right/left feature, it think it would be good for that also.

For find results that are already on the viewable page, I don't like it, especially if I am using find next/prev to quickly move up and down; the rocking does get annoying.

I am still undecided about it when it comes to jumping to a section of code when clicking on an error/warning/todo.

I don't know what their plans are for this, but it might be better if you could turn it on and off for certain features, areas and such.

For example, some might like it for editting, but not for debugging.

Just a thought.

0
Comment actions Permalink

Sorry, I know this may sound harsh...
I don't know how much time was spent getting animated
scrolling to work,
but I cannot fathom how this is such a useful feature
that it needed to be added
at this point.


This will sound harsh too:

I really can't fathom how its any of your business

0
Comment actions Permalink


Wierdly enough, I can. Although I don't like animated scrolling, and will undoubtedly be turning it off, I have absolutely no issue with any effort that goes to ergonomics or human factors on my most common daily tool. I may disagree with with particular effort, but the idea of putting in a new bit of ergonomics functionality into the product at this stage is to be applauded, not derided.

(Now, AspectJ support, that's a waste of effort.)

0
Comment actions Permalink

ouch.

"Bryan Young" <BryanYoung@scruffles.net> wrote in message
news:885983.1065205409355.JavaMail.itn@is.intellij.net...

Sorry, I know this may sound harsh...
I don't know how much time was spent getting animated
scrolling to work,
but I cannot fathom how this is such a useful feature
that it needed to be added
at this point.

>

This will sound harsh too:

>

I really can't fathom how its any of your business



0
Comment actions Permalink

(Now, AspectJ support, that's a waste of effort.)


That's were I totally disagree. It looks rather obvious to me that Aspect
programming will be a hottest programming paradigm in 2-3 years. Those who
will be late to a new bonanza will be left mumbling behind like many C
programmers some 15 years ago. I still remember all those articles how is
OOP was not worth anything and how all good functional C programmers would
beat new fad.

Regards,
Alex Oscherov

"Dave Griffith" <dave.griffith@cnn.com> wrote in message
news:3734660.1065209585768.JavaMail.itn@is.intellij.net...
>

Wierdly enough, I can. Although I don't like animated scrolling, and will

undoubtedly be turning it off, I have absolutely no issue with any
effort that goes to ergonomics or human factors on my most common daily
tool. I may disagree with with particular effort, but the idea of putting
in a new bit of ergonomics functionality into the product at this stage is
to be applauded, not derided.
>

(Now, AspectJ support, that's a waste of effort.)



0
Comment actions Permalink

Most of the people I know who dislike aspects do so not because of its novelty but rather for its seemingly dangerous and haphazard modification of a class' contract and implementation.

0
Comment actions Permalink

(Now, AspectJ support, that's a waste of effort.)

Well, it may catch on. It may not.

In any case, it certainly doesn't belong in IDEA as a core function. Not at this stage anyway.

0
Comment actions Permalink

+It looks rather obvious to me that Aspect
programming will be a hottest programming paradigm in 2-3 years.+

I think the jury's still out on that one, but I'll keep an open mind.

Those who will be late to a new bonanza will be left mumbling behind like many C programmers some 15 years ago.

When the Internet bubble burst; the only people I knew who didn't suffer long gaps without work, work C programmers. They carried on making an incredibly good living ....

I still remember all those articles how is OOP was not worth anything and how all good functional C programmers would beat new fad.

The difference there is that OOP did come up with a better way to write robust, maintainable applications. I'm not sure that this is the case with Aspects.


0
Comment actions Permalink

Kirk,
without doubt aspects allow to create very haphazardous and unmaintainable
code but the same argument can be applied to OO programming. Probably most
of us met such masterpieces of OOP as class "Person" derived from class
"String" or something of this nature. In my practice I saw a lot of examples
when attempt to write OO code resulted in much worse code than the one that
could be written by using strait C. But new technologies get judged (in my
opinion) by the best not worst applications. Judicious application of AOP
will create more maintainable and reusable software. AOP looks to me fixes
the biggest problem of the current programming model which I see as
necessity for every class, to be able to be processed uniformly, to expose
qualities it logically doesn't contain. For example in the system where
every object should be traceable class "Person" should implement "Traceable"
which is logically wrong.

Regards,
Alex Oscherov


"Kirk Woll" <kirk@digimax.com> wrote in message
news:8028325.1065311373864.JavaMail.itn@is.intellij.net...

Most of the people I know who dislike aspects do so not because of its

novelty but rather for its seemingly dangerous and haphazard modification of
a class' contract and implementation.


0
Comment actions Permalink

For example in the system where every object should be traceable class "Person" should implement "Traceable" which is logically wrong.

MMmmm .. Okay, why is this illogical, and why is the AOP way correct?

0
Comment actions Permalink

Rayz wrote:

For example in the system where every object should be traceable class "Person" should implement "Traceable" which is logically wrong.

MMmmm .. Okay, why is this illogical, and why is the AOP way correct?


Think separation of concerns. Being traceable is an orthogonal concept to
being a Person, so adding methods to Person just to make it traceable
dilutes the clarity of the class (as well as making it less reusable &
harder to change).

AOP allows you to say "I want this class to be traceable" without having to
clutter it up with code that has nothing to do with the main purpose of the
class. More importantly, it allows you to do that for a group of classes.

Hope that helps,
Vil.
--
Vilya Harvey
vilya.harvey@digitalsteps.com / digital steps /
(W) +44 (0)1483 469 480
(M) +44 (0)7816 678 457 http://www.digitalsteps.com/

Disclaimer

This 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.

0
Comment actions Permalink

... thanks for that.

0
Comment actions Permalink

Dave Griffith wrote:

(Now, AspectJ support, that's a waste of effort.)


That's a bit harsh. I can see how AspectJ support is going to be
important for some people, and totally irrelevant for others. That
suggests to me that it should not be core IDEA functionality, but rather
a plugin.

Ciao,
Gordon

--
Gordon Tyler (Software Developer)
Quest Software <http://java.quest.com/>
260 King Street East, Toronto, Ontario M5A 4L5, Canada
Voice: 416-643-4846 | Fax: 416-594-1919

0

Please sign in to leave a comment.