undefined | Better HN

0 pointsratww3y ago0 comments

Sorry, but Electron is amazing if the alternative is "nothing". Same for game-specific editors. Some companies can't do it, so in this case Unity/Unreal editors are indeed better. And some engines also don't have the manpower to do engine-specific editors, so if something already existed it would be by definition better to the world.

And I completely disagree about JetBrains products being more integrated. Some integrations are MUCH better and deeper in VSCode. To give three recent examples I came across: Vue, React and Svelte. WebStorm doesn't even have some features offered by VSCode, like typechecking in templates. Not to mention that, at least to me, VSCode is significantly lighter than WebStorm and runs much faster in older laptops.

VSCode is also significantly faster and much much lighter than the ultra-integrated and native Visual Studio, so there's also that. I know because I use both, and I know which one locks up all the time and takes 40GB of disk. Seems like they just didn't use the optimisation opportunities.

Either way, this discussion doesn't seem to be going anywhere. There's doesn't seem to be anything for us to learn here. I'm addressing every new single point you make, while you keep moving the goalposts by cherry-picking my posts while ignoring the parts I cover :/

We started this discussion by saying "it would be awesome if X existed" to which you said "100% disagree". Sounds like you don't want me to have some tools, or maybe you're under the assumption that my desire is for Unity/Unreal/Godot to stop existing, which is definitely not the case.

0 comments

3 comments · 1 top-level

Ygg23y ago· 2 in thread

> Sorry, but Electron is amazing if the alternative is "nothing".

The alternative isn't nothing. The alternative is either Java, Qt, Gnome, Slint, rolling your own, doing per OS UI, etc.

People don't want to roll their own (understandable) or don't mind paying performance tax for stuff they don't need.

I don't use WebStorm but yeah a browser (VSCode) is better at rendering JS than a Java IDE (IntelliJ). Ofc a browser will have an advantage on home turf.

That said quality differs, but honestly try debugging Rust in VSCode vs CLion. Worlds of difference. Even if CLion isn't the best Rust plugin. Or Java in VSCode vs IntelliJ.

> We started this discussion by saying "it would be awesome if X existed" to which you said "100% disagree".

Your idea is a generic game editor vs something specific like Warcraft 3 editor, I made an analogy between something like LSP vs more integrated stuff like IntelliJ.

And I showed you what you leave if you make LSP primary focus, there are going to be some use cases that won't work in generic case, that a more specific IDE (or Rappid Application Deveploer env) would work with.

ratwwOP3y ago

> The alternative isn't nothing. The alternative is either Java, Qt, Gnome, Slint, rolling your own, doing per OS UI, etc.

I said IF the alternative is nothing. IF. Read that again. Read the whole context. Words are important. Don't skip them. Stop cherry-picking. Your point is only true IF I have money, time and knowledge to use those. I might not have it. Are you gonna come to my company and code all this stuff, for free? Most game teams don't have the budget, so they won't have a custom editor and will have to use something like Unity/Unreal/Godot. And most potential engine writers don't have the budget for writing editors, hence my mention that there is a place for something generic.

> don't mind paying performance tax for stuff they don't need

The performance tax is higher in some JetBrains projects. It is also significantly higher in Visual Studio Enterprise than in VSCode. "Integrated" doesn't mean "faster".

> Your idea is a generic game editor vs something specific like Warcraft 3 editor

It's not. My idea was an open-source scene editor that engines can choose to support when they can't make a proprietary and engine-specific scene editor. You're the one who brought Warcraft 3 into the conversation. I also don't understand the "vs" part. Let me try to simplify my point to you: People who have time and money make X, should have X. People who can't make X, would ideally have an Y option too.

If you don't want to use such an editor, just don't use it, period. Claiming it won't be helpful to people and a community that wouldn't otherwise be able to build an alternative is asinine.

> I don't use WebStorm but yeah a browser (VSCode) is better at rendering JS than a Java IDE (IntelliJ).

"Rendering JS"? This is nonsensical, the JS code is run either in a browser during dev time or in a separate process for typechecking. An IDE is not a runtime. Please inform yourself before making such ludicrous statements.

> And I showed

You really haven't demonstrated anything, sorry. The cherry-picked CLion example doesn't negate the fact that there are counterexamples. Your ignorance doesn't invalidate the counterexamples. To me it sounds as if you're completely out of your depth here and just trying to win a random internet argument, and has absolutely nothing to contribute to this conversation. What you propose already exists but costs money. Why can't we have the alternative?

Ygg23y ago

> I said IF the alternative is nothing. IF. Read that again. Read the whole context.

Re-read it. It still is unclear. An app made in Electron could have been written in something else. What use case do you have where the alternative is nothing. The IF is almost never valid. Even if it doesn't exist yet, you can make it.

> Most game teams don't have the budget, so they won't have a custom editor and will have to use something like Unity/Unreal/Godot.

Sounds like excuses. Get a bigger team, smaller scope, or more money.

I've used Unity vs custom-made engines and ease, and just fun of the use of well-made customized engine beats Unity/Godot (I haven't used Unreal lately) in almost every way. Like time for Unity to start alone is 5min, plus Unity makes a certain style of games nigh-impossible to develop.

E.g. two similarily complex projects https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BT1B4HkEhfQ

First is UnityStation in Unity, second is SS14 in C#. And Unity is a lot of pain to work with.

> Claiming it won't be helpful to people and a community that wouldn't otherwise be able to build an alternative is asinine.

I said it would be more helpful to focus on building a specific viewer for a particular type of game. Sure, you can make a viewer that is meh at being a top-down, isometric, 3D, hyperbolic, pixel art, vector, etc.

Or an editor that's great at just pixel art - Like Aseprite. Or a 2D Level editor - like LDtk.

Do one thing correct vs. do many things tolerable.

>"Rendering JS"?

Lapsus linguae. I meant to write debugging. So read it as, debugging JS in JS VM, isn't as good as debugging JS in JVM and vice versa (JVM in JS).

> The cherry-picked CLion example doesn't negate the fact that there are counterexamples.

Implying your example isn't cherry-picked? Really? How much have you used VSCode for languages with other VMs?

> Why can't we have the alternative?

I'm not saying you can't have the alternative; I think most of the time, it's a wrong trade-off.

I found myself preferring "the right tool for the job" over "everything and the kitchen sink" approach. And yeah, there are benefits to merging stuff and keeping it all in one place. See the link to Ralph Levinen's blog.

But, I tolerate IDEs because the integration of debugger and code help + highlight is obligatory, but I would lie if I didn't use a simpler tool if I need to quickly and speedily edit something.

Now compare Rider C# Ide to Unity IDE, that integrates even more into the mix. So it's C#, 3D Editor/Viewer, engine, etc.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse