Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [ide-dev] VS Code

On 14 Sep 2016, at 16:54, Doug Schaefer wrote:

On 2016-09-14, 2:25 PM, "ide-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Gorkem Ercan" <ide-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of gorkem.ercan@xxxxxxxxx>

On 13 Sep 2016, at 16:06, Doug Schaefer wrote:

OK, gang, it¹s time to start talking about this. I¹d love to hear
what people think of Visual Studio Code and it¹s potential as an
IDE. Are there things that it does that are better than what we have
in the Eclipse IDE? It is technically feasible to go in that same
direction? Do we even want to?

VS Code is a coding editor not an IDE. It caters a different workflow
than IDEs. Yes there are ideas here and there that can be applied to
Eclipse workflows such as the language server but I think Eclipse should
continue to improve on its workflow and not borrow a new one.

I¹ve heard this argument before. What¹s an IDE?

As soon as you have integration with a debugger, I consider you an IDE. VS
Code has that.

What features does Eclipse have that makes it an IDE that VS Code would
never have?

If you want to call both IDE, then let’s call them IDE.
The fact is Eclipse and VS Code are for different workflows. For instance our recommendation for running Java applications on VS Code is to use the
maven exec plugin. I think this is unacceptable workflow for an Eclipse
developer yet others [1] are really happy with it.


As the Java language server grows and serves VS Code, I wonder how
good of a Java IDE it could become.

As a coincidence, We have released the VSCode extension that uses JDT
based server to marketplace yesterday. As Fred puts ³it is making
hipsters use eclipse and m2e² [2] :)


It¹s not a coincidence at all :). That event triggered my curiosity here. If developers have a great experience working with Java code in VS Code with Maven, say, and add a debug integration, they become a player in the
Java IDE space. Which would be really cool in my books.

I am also starting to wonder that about C++ with either a CDT based
language server or something built on Clang (which I believe they have

C++ language server is something interesting. The current C++ server
from MSFT is lacking a few important features. I think a CDT based
server may actually be the answer.

We¹ve long discussed using the clang static analyzer as a replacement of CDT¹s indexer. The amount of work would be immense and we¹re not sure yet whether it¹s better anyway. Going the other way and adding the language server protocol to CDT¹s indexer should be easier and opens the door to swap it out if we really decide we want to. We¹ll see where the winds take


ide-dev mailing list
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit

Back to the top