Negative votes

Can we please please have the ability to assign negative votes to some feature requests? I think this would actually help a lot, since then it becomes possible to see what sort of things people hate. It would also enable a more complete picture to be seen for some of the popular-but-dumb feature requests. Eg, if a feature request has a lot of negative votes and positive ones, then it's controversial. If it has only positive votes, then chances are a lot of people like it and nobody will be too upset.

I mean, someone has to stand up and stop things like:

http://www.intellij.net/tracker/idea/viewSCR?publicId=13472
http://www.intellij.net/tracker/idea/viewSCR?publicId=13037
http://www.intellij.net/tracker/idea/viewSCR?publicId=12843

(I got bored of looking after the first few)

18 comments
Comment actions Permalink

Hani,

I can see #2 being lame, but what's wrong with #1 and 3???

R

"Hani Suleiman" <hani@formicary.net> wrote in message
news:30430220.1056042799871.JavaMail.itn@is.intellij.net...

Can we please please have the ability to assign negative votes to some

feature requests? I think this would actually help a lot, since then it
becomes possible to see what sort of things people hate. It would also
enable a more complete picture to be seen for some of the popular-but-dumb
feature requests. Eg, if a feature request has a lot of negative votes and
positive ones, then it's controversial. If it has only positive votes, then
chances are a lot of people like it and nobody will be too upset.
>

I mean, someone has to stand up and stop things like:

>

http://www.intellij.net/tracker/idea/viewSCR?publicId=13472
http://www.intellij.net/tracker/idea/viewSCR?publicId=13037
http://www.intellij.net/tracker/idea/viewSCR?publicId=12843

>

(I got bored of looking after the first few)

>


0
Comment actions Permalink

Well, Beanshell in Ant (#3) is also lame. Those build files wouldn't be real Ant files anymore. What I love about Ant is that I can run it on my desktop manually and it can be run automatically on the server.
Beanshell would only pollute the fine and quite clear concept behind Ant.

0
Comment actions Permalink

#2 It partial have logic. For example Visual Studio .NET can have extension
for any syntax support. I know that Perl module for Visual Studio .NET
exists and used.

--
Alexey Efimov, Software Engineer
Sputnik Labs,
http://www.spklabs.com
"Robert S. Sfeir" <robert@codepuccino.com> wrote in message
news:bcsr6t$5ef$1@is.intellij.net...

Hani,

>

I can see #2 being lame, but what's wrong with #1 and 3???

>

R

>

"Hani Suleiman" <hani@formicary.net> wrote in message
news:30430220.1056042799871.JavaMail.itn@is.intellij.net...

Can we please please have the ability to assign negative votes to some

feature requests? I think this would actually help a lot, since then it
becomes possible to see what sort of things people hate. It would also
enable a more complete picture to be seen for some of the popular-but-dumb
feature requests. Eg, if a feature request has a lot of negative votes and
positive ones, then it's controversial. If it has only positive votes,

then

chances are a lot of people like it and nobody will be too upset.
>

I mean, someone has to stand up and stop things like:

>

http://www.intellij.net/tracker/idea/viewSCR?publicId=13472
http://www.intellij.net/tracker/idea/viewSCR?publicId=13037
http://www.intellij.net/tracker/idea/viewSCR?publicId=12843

>

(I got bored of looking after the first few)

>

>
>


0
Comment actions Permalink

Hey Hani, thanks for bringing #2 to my attention. Native Python support
would make Idea the IDE of choice for LOTS of people around me here. In
fact, when I show it to people the reaction usually goes - "this is awesome.
can it do python"? Perhaps you are in a different environment; I have 300
researchers here, a third of which are now coding in Python (not me). And
mind you, these people do buy their software (the lab does).
Does it still look lame to you?
Paul
PS. I'm not the author of the request.

"Alexey Efimov" <aefimov@spklabs.com> wrote in message
news:bcsvtm$ii9$1@is.intellij.net...

#2 It partial have logic. For example Visual Studio .NET can have

extension

for any syntax support. I know that Perl module for Visual Studio .NET
exists and used.

>

--
Alexey Efimov, Software Engineer
Sputnik Labs,
http://www.spklabs.com
"Robert S. Sfeir" <robert@codepuccino.com> wrote in message
news:bcsr6t$5ef$1@is.intellij.net...

Hani,

>

I can see #2 being lame, but what's wrong with #1 and 3???

>

R

>

"Hani Suleiman" <hani@formicary.net> wrote in message
news:30430220.1056042799871.JavaMail.itn@is.intellij.net...

Can we please please have the ability to assign negative votes to some

feature requests? I think this would actually help a lot, since then it
becomes possible to see what sort of things people hate. It would also
enable a more complete picture to be seen for some of the

popular-but-dumb

feature requests. Eg, if a feature request has a lot of negative votes

and

positive ones, then it's controversial. If it has only positive votes,

then

chances are a lot of people like it and nobody will be too upset.
>

I mean, someone has to stand up and stop things like:

>

http://www.intellij.net/tracker/idea/viewSCR?publicId=13472
http://www.intellij.net/tracker/idea/viewSCR?publicId=13037
http://www.intellij.net/tracker/idea/viewSCR?publicId=12843

>

(I got bored of looking after the first few)

>

>
>

>
>


0
Comment actions Permalink

Not real ant files anymore? the task is there for something and is part of ant right? Sometimes declarative language like ant do not cut it when you have large system with a lot of interdependent jars and a lot of repetitive tasks. Obviously you could write custom tasks to do the same but scripting is obviously easier and faster. Just my take on it. Jacques "Robert F. Beeger" ]]> wrote in message
news:20331600.1056043547915.JavaMail.itn@is.intellij.net...

Well, Beanshell in Ant (#3) is also lame. Those build files wouldn't be

real Ant files anymore. What I love about Ant is that I can run it on my
desktop manually and it can be run automatically on the server.

Beanshell would only pollute the fine and quite clear concept behind Ant.



0
Comment actions Permalink

Hani,

Could you elaborate a little bit?
As the author of 1) I would like to hear your take on it. As for me, I
submitted this just because we are going to get 95% of this with AJ
compiler. After discussing with Eugene Z. it appears that they are going to
do incremental mode anyway for aspects and since they are going to use their
builtin make in the ant task we are also getting incremental mode for POJOs
too. Hence the request, so everybody knows what is planned.
The other two sounds logical too. Personally for me 3) would be nice since
we have very large projects with a lot of jars which right now are handled
with a lot of duplication in the ant file. beanshell would be a solution to
remove the duplication and be more data driven.

Jacques

"Hani Suleiman" <hani@formicary.net> wrote in message
news:30430220.1056042799871.JavaMail.itn@is.intellij.net...

Can we please please have the ability to assign negative votes to some

feature requests? I think this would actually help a lot, since then it
becomes possible to see what sort of things people hate. It would also
enable a more complete picture to be seen for some of the popular-but-dumb
feature requests. Eg, if a feature request has a lot of negative votes and
positive ones, then it's controversial. If it has only positive votes, then
chances are a lot of people like it and nobody will be too upset.
>

I mean, someone has to stand up and stop things like:

>

http://www.intellij.net/tracker/idea/viewSCR?publicId=13472
http://www.intellij.net/tracker/idea/viewSCR?publicId=13037
http://www.intellij.net/tracker/idea/viewSCR?publicId=12843

>

(I got bored of looking after the first few)

>


0
Comment actions Permalink

Alright, to clarify:

1) AspectJ is already a very ludicrous addition (and it's really, really nice to see that I'm not the only person who thinks so). But for better or worse, it's done. Endlessly requesting new features for it and seeing the IntelliJ spend dedicate more and more time to it is like rubbing salt in our wounds.

2) Python Integration: Ok, so you have a few hundred people who use Python. How about the other few hundred who use Ruby? The 20 or so who use Erlang? The six who use Haskell? Maybe if they all squeeled loudly enough they could get themselves heard.

3) java code in ant scripts: This is horrific abuse of xml. If you want to do small repeatable units of code, stick them in a task like normal human beings do. For IDEA to support such a ludicrously bad solution is very irresponsible, in my opinion.

Of course, all this is made more irritating by the fact that my projects don't load and haven't been loading without internal errors since IDEA 816.

0
Comment actions Permalink

1) AspectJ is already a very ludicrous addition (and it's really, really

nice to see that I'm not the only person who thinks so). But for better or
worse, it's done. Endlessly requesting new features for it and seeing the
IntelliJ spend dedicate more and more time to it is like rubbing salt in our
wounds.
>
This brings up a good point though about the viability of IDEA aspect
strategy: they built their own proprietary technology. However the IntelliJ
team apparently decided after evaluation that they did not find a good usage
of AJ for developing IDEA.
I believe part of the success of IDEA so far was that the IntelliJ team was
extremely skilled and smart and was "eating their own dog food". Therefore
they had the perfect combination of great talent and creativity with
extremely short feedback cycle, the recipe of success.
For AJ it is no longer the case. The only feedback is from the user
community which is much slower and potentially not as high quality. In
addition since they have no internal incentive to track AJ enhancements, I
would fear the completely opposite effect than Hani: that further aspect
development would always come after other new features or worse end up not
being implemented at all.

I hope that by creating their own support, IntelliJ is committed to keep it
alive and kicking until it is clear that AJ is not a viable solution.

Jacques


0
Comment actions Permalink

Well, I think the addition of the script task was a great mistake. It breaks the clear structure of Ant build files.
Ok, you can write your own scripts and do things with Ant you couldn't do before. But do we really want those things to be done in an Ant file. I think not.
You ever read a gnu make file? It's horrible. There are thousands of options and understanding a make file is very difficult therefore.
I want to be able to read Ant files without having to know each scripting language that could be used in such a script task.

0
Comment actions Permalink

I hope that by creating their own support, IntelliJ is committed to keep it alive and kicking until it is clear that AJ is not a viable solution.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but what you appear to be saying, is that IntelliJ should carry on developing AJ support, until someone comes along and proves that AJ isn't viable; and then they should stop?

Wouldn't it be better to wait until AJ proves viable, then develop support for it in IDEA?

0
Comment actions Permalink

My thoughts exactly.

1) AspectJ is already a very ludicrous addition (and it's really, really nice to see that I'm not the only person who thinks so). But for better or worse, it's done. Endlessly requesting new features for it and seeing the IntelliJ spend dedicate more and more time to it is like rubbing salt in our wounds.

I think you'll have to let this one go. The ball is already rolling, and I don't think it will stop. IDEA will have the best support for AJ, and it will be completed about the time that AspectJ is replaced with AspectJPythonSharp.

2) Python Integration: Ok, so you have a few hundred people who use Python. How about the other few hundred who use Ruby? The 20 or so who use Erlang? The six who use Haskell? Maybe if they all squeeled loudly enough they could get themselves heard.

I think the problem here is the plug-in architecture. Without a decent plug-in architecture, JetBrains will be forever adding new, exciting esoteric features, instead of concentrating on fixing bugs.

3) java code in ant scripts: This is horrific abuse of xml. If you want to do small repeatable units of code, stick them in a task like normal human beings do. For IDEA to support such a ludicrously bad solution is very irresponsible, in my opinion.

Y'know, I reckon this is why Sun is so reluctant to open source Java completely. There's no telling what will end up in there ....

0
Comment actions Permalink

Nice idea, but I don't think it will work.

Again it's down to the big picture. Folk will be happy to have IDEA stuffed full of everything, because they have the view that if they don't need it, then they can just ignore it.

As long as I get my support for Truffle+, then what's the harm if someone else gets support for SnoopySharp?

Meanwhile, IDEA gets bigger and more unwieldy, with massively large context menus that you have to scan down to find what you want.

The problem isn't the voting; it's the architecture. IDEA desperately needs a plug-in architecture thet can match Eclipse.

Then if folk want AspectJ support, they can just download it as a plug-in. Having it as part of the core application just doesn't make any sense to me.






0
Comment actions Permalink


"Hani Suleiman" <hani@formicary.net> wrote in message
news:19234234.1056083510492.JavaMail.itn@is.intellij.net...

Alright, to clarify:

>

1) AspectJ is already a very ludicrous addition (and it's really, really

nice to see that I'm not the only person who thinks so). But for better or
worse, it's done. Endlessly requesting new features for it and seeing the
IntelliJ spend dedicate more and more time to it is like rubbing salt in our
wounds.
>

I'm with the 'other' side on this one :)

2) Python Integration: Ok, so you have a few hundred people who use

Python. How about the other few hundred who use Ruby? The 20 or so who use
Erlang? The six who use Haskell? Maybe if they all squeeled loudly enough
they could get themselves heard.
>

Exactly my point!

3) java code in ant scripts: This is horrific abuse of xml. If you want to

do small repeatable units of code, stick them in a task like normal human
beings do. For IDEA to support such a ludicrously bad solution is very
irresponsible, in my opinion.
>

Oh hey I had not really noticed that, I just saw CDATA and didn't pay much
attention to anything else, but now that you mention it and I look at it
again, I AGREE! That's pretty godaweful. Yeah no Java code and crap like
that in XML thanks... well not in ANT build files anyway.

R


0
Comment actions Permalink

Hani Suleiman wrote:

Can we please please have the ability to assign negative votes to some feature requests? I think this would actually help a lot, since then it becomes possible to see what sort of things people hate. It would also enable a more complete picture to be seen for some of the popular-but-dumb feature requests. Eg, if a feature request has a lot of negative votes and positive ones, then it's controversial. If it has only positive votes, then chances are a lot of people like it and nobody will be too upset.

I mean, someone has to stand up and stop things like:

http://www.intellij.net/tracker/idea/viewSCR?publicId=13472
http://www.intellij.net/tracker/idea/viewSCR?publicId=13037
http://www.intellij.net/tracker/idea/viewSCR?publicId=12843

(I got bored of looking after the first few)



There's a few things I'd like to drop some negative votes against.

0
Comment actions Permalink

Hani, Java is not a religion. Or is it? Having support for multiple
languages (be it as plugins or as a core) would open IDEA to all kinds of
people, including the ones who like/have to build solutions involving more
than one language. Currently AFAIK there is not a single IDE the level of
IDEA that allows you to do that. Quite a market niche for the IntelliJ.

I do agree however that there is a need for a more robust plug-in
architecture.

"Hani Suleiman" <hani@formicary.net> wrote in message
news:19234234.1056083510492.JavaMail.itn@is.intellij.net...

2) Python Integration: Ok, so you have a few hundred people who use

Python. How about the other few hundred who use Ruby? The 20 or so who use
Erlang? The six who use Haskell? Maybe if they all squeeled loudly enough
they could get themselves heard.


0
Comment actions Permalink

+Hani, Java is not a religion. Or is it? +

No, it's not a religion, but it's not a playground either.

Having support for multiple languages (be it as plugins or as a core) would open IDEA to all kinds of people, including the ones who like/have to build solutions involving more than one language.

Having support for multiple languages in the core, would eventually make IDEA unusable. If it can be supported with plug-ins, then fine; those who don't need to use AspectJ or Perl, don't have to have the interface cluttered with support for them.

+Currently AFAIK there is not a single IDE the level of
IDEA that allows you to do that. Quite a market niche for the IntelliJ.+

I think Eclipse supports multiple-language, but certainly not in the core application (if Eclipse has such a thing).


0
Comment actions Permalink

I think this is the direction they are going. They are working on the open api. It's taken a while to get it but getting something done right takes time.

0

Please sign in to leave a comment.