a fact which gets parroted around various fora without any understanding of the problem because "it works on their computer" It seems that much of the improvements are for the benefit of MacOS X users, while the policy of sticking with a version 11 JDK is to the detriment of users on other platforms.
INTELLIJ VS PYCHARM MAC OS
Some debugging features are not available, but I haven't missed them.Īt this point JetBrains would do well to take a leaf out of Apple's playbook from 2009 when they shipped the Snow Leopard release (Yes I am one of those that thinks that Snow Leopard was the best release of Mac OS X.) which concentrated solely on quality and speed, and no new features. It was the biggest single productivity gain I've made in the past year, and I have had zero stability problems. ) I _instantly_ began to regain the feeling of fluidity of thought in my work. Once I had got to the bottom of it (notes here. and then asking myself if I'm alone in this particular slow-motion hell-hole or is the world really like this?! In the end my thoughts stopped racing and I began to think, yeah, well, I just gotta endure it. Listen, JetBrains: I have wasted enough time (while my thoughts race ahead trying to work on my projects) sat on my phatass 64Gb NVMe-equipped Xeon, nvidia (native driver) Debian workstation waiting for pycharm et al to mooch along like at a stately pace redrawing the screen like it's a 1994 486 with an HDD. They (JetBrains) have been actively fucking a portion of their (one would think, technically savvy) customers by not giving them the most responsive system they can to run, then acting all paternalistic and gaslighty by saying "oh we don't recommend you use anything other than the one we ship." when people complain. Ironic for a company called "jet" brains. They are actually usable and don't leave you feeling like you've been thinking in molasses. Try running their products on a more recent JVM. JetBrains' attitude to this has been horrendous. While the libraries might be sometimes internally complex, they are often way easier to use than the counterparts in languages with no such support. Macros and metaprogramming are not obscure features - those are the core features that often make basic stuff work like serialization, database access, command line argument parsing or data formatting. > Arguably, IntelliJ (or any IDE) shouldn't expand macros at all, and "more advanced" is codeword for "uses obscure features in non-trivial ways". The fundamental problem is, in order to make it work correctly they have to reimplement the whole compiler frontend, which is a very ambitious goal, and they likely don't have resources to do that for the many languages that Idea wants to support. Or it misses the stuff expanded from a procedural derive macro. Many of those problems are because Intellij type inference infers a wrong type, then it can't resolve a method or field because it's looking it up in the wrong place.
INTELLIJ VS PYCHARM CODE
Search for "good code red" on their bugtracker - this is going on for years. No, it often flags perfectly correct (compiling and working) code. Doesn't this just means that IntelliJ, being an independent implementation, flags problems that a compiler frontend doesn't, and vice-versa?