Not new at all. The Lotus Designer tool has this type of interface, and has for years. It's a very intuitive interface in a three pane view, with app events and objects in the left, the GUI in the top right pane, and the code in the bottom right. I'm VERY happy that they've done this. I was having a very hard time adapting to XCode as everything I seemed to need was somewhere else in the GUI. This is a very welcome change.
I haven't seen XCode 4 yet but will take your account in mind when trying to adjust to it.
Quote:
Although I find adapting to C very easy, I'm having a horrible time of it trying to figure out how to link GUI to code, where it was dead simple in the Lotus Designer. Hopefully this will make things easier. I can't stick in a command prompt for my code forever and now that I've branched out, I'm getting lost.
Frankly I've never seen anything as ugly as ugly as the combo of XCode and interface builder. I've never gotten the hang of it and have found that building an interface in code is often easier. The platform is just completely unlike just about every IDE out there and for the life of me I don't know why it is so complex.
Of course it might not be complex but rather I haven't oriented my mind to it. It's possible but I blame that on the lack of any good tutorials that explain what is going on. It is almost like Apple doesn't want you to know how the damn thing works. It is just a disgusting piece of software.
Will there finally be support for python scripts and debugging in xcode?
I learned the hardway not to do Python development in XCode. It got really nasty before I realized I could rely on indentation. So I understand what you are asking here, but can't answer your question.
Ruby might be supported though as Apple seems to be very fond of that language. MacRuby has come a long way and is supported in XCode today. Frankly I don't know if Apple has long term goals for Python but it is obvious that Ruby is being looked after.
In any event I'd like to extend your question by asking what is the condition of Fortran support? No I don't have any intention of using it myself, it is just a desire to support open source software that uses Fortran.
Frankly I've never seen anything as ugly as ugly as the combo of XCode and interface builder. I've never gotten the hang of it and have found that building an interface in code is often easier. The platform is just completely unlike just about every IDE out there and for the life of me I don't know why it is so complex.
Of course it might not be complex but rather I haven't oriented my mind to it. It's possible but I blame that on the lack of any good tutorials that explain what is going on. It is almost like Apple doesn't want you to know how the damn thing works. It is just a disgusting piece of software.
I think the guys over at Apress for example, and the thousands of us that use it would suggest otherwise.
To me it's a real shame Apple didn't make a big deal about this at the last keynote. Admittedly there's absolutely nothing original in this and to anyone who's a developer for Windows is probably reading this and think wtf we've had all this stuff for the last decade, and wtf tool's help manage memory, you still manually manage memory! But at least Apple has finally got the message, the reason people want to use 3rd party tools to develop iPhone apps is because XCode sucks, and now their finally doing something about it.
However, all that being said, at the same time as me thinking this is great there starting to catch up. Whenever I've had the conversation of XCode sucks compared to Visual Studio, I've always respected the fact that it's a different type of development and the people want their tools to work in different ways. So maybe lot's of Mac/iOS developers are going to hate this. Hope not as that would also mean my side of the argument was right and Visual Studio rules compared to XCode but only time will tell.
It must be a hell of a great program then, or you judge way too superficially.
Perhaps Xcode is the only IDE you have used for a long time. Because if you regularly used Eclipse, Visual Studio and common text editors like UltraEdit, you would know exactly what I was talking about.
The programs mentioned above are the "gold standard" .NET and Java IDEs, which are the languages used by the majority of companies, and therefore the majority of developers. And through some "invisible hand" these IDEs (and common programmer editors) have settled on some de facto standards about what things are called ("scripts" not "schemes") and common key shortcuts (e.g. TAB to autocomplete). There are even common window layouts where logs are always in a certain place on the screen relative to the code, as are class hierarchies.
So when a professional developer downloads Xcode at home to see what all the fuss is about, it seems to him that everything is needlessly renamed and moved around. And not the kind of "pleasant surprise" difference that comes from innovation (which everyone must be in favor of), but the frustrating difference that comes from the pseudo-innovation of changing the name of something.
Then 3 hours later this professional developer, who has solved problems for many organizations, and could probably write some great iPhone apps, throws up his hands and says "What a POS," and goes back to what he was doing. Do we ever wonder why there are less than 50 really amazing iPad apps, and the rest are just filler? Is there really that little imagination in the world? I think it's because most App Store developers are amateurs. The professionals find that Apple tools do not follow the standards of their profession and lose interest in the platform. I think the Xcode team need to get out more.
Ruby might be supported though as Apple seems to be very fond of that language. MacRuby has come a long way and is supported in XCode today. Frankly I don't know if Apple has long term goals for Python but it is obvious that Ruby is being looked after.
This link to the Scottish Ruby Conf. makes it quite clear that MacRuby is likely to have a role to play in both Mac OS and iOS development.
Perhaps Xcode is the only IDE you have used for a long time. Because if you regularly used Eclipse, Visual Studio and common text editors like UltraEdit, you would know exactly what I was talking about.
The programs mentioned above are the "gold standard" .NET and Java IDEs, which are the languages used by the majority of companies, and therefore the majority of developers. And through some "invisible hand" these IDEs (and common programmer editors) have settled on some de facto standards about what things are called ("scripts" not "schemes") and common key shortcuts (e.g. TAB to autocomplete). There are even common window layouts where logs are always in a certain place on the screen relative to the code, as are class hierarchies.
So when a professional developer downloads Xcode at home to see what all the fuss is about, it seems to him that everything is needlessly renamed and moved around. And not the kind of "pleasant surprise" difference that comes from innovation (which everyone must be in favor of), but the frustrating difference that comes from the pseudo-innovation of changing the name of something.
Then 3 hours later this professional developer, who has solved problems for many organizations, and could probably write some great iPhone apps, throws up his hands and says "What a POS," and goes back to what he was doing. Do we ever wonder why there are less than 50 really amazing iPad apps, and the rest are just filler? Is there really that little imagination in the world? I think it's because most App Store developers are amateurs. The professionals find that Apple tools do not follow the standards of their profession and lose interest in the platform. I think the Xcode team need to get out more.
Looking at the fact, that the device is just sold for two month 50 really amazing iPad Apps is huge.
I haven't seen 50 really amazing Java, .Net Apps (like e.g. iWork, Omnigraffle, 3D-Games etc. ) on a comparable device until now. So some Pros seem to be able to deal with it while Java and .Net aren't a free ticket for pro applications.
I also have a hard time to get used to XCode although I'm developing software for many years. I can understand your pain and I have great hopes for XCode 4.
That aside it's no good style to degrade other developers which are able to deal with it as amateurs in order to emphasize yourself as pro.
I haven't seen any of your applications, but I instantly hope that it's not only your arrogance that can be labeled as pro.
I wish Apple would stop messing with the UI of Xcode, and simply make their debugger work. The debugger is so broken, I don't even know where to begin. Breakpoints sometimes don't work, watchpoints don't work, expressions don't work. The debugger crashes trying to view C++ objects.. etc etc. It's a complete cluster-f*ck. And here they sit playing around with UI elements. Its pathetic.
And, least anyone think I'm just venting, I had a friend that went to work for Apple on Final Cut Pro. I asked him "Hey, how do you deal with the fact that Xcode's debugger is so broken?" He said "We mostly just use printfs." This is an Apple engineer, admitting that they can't even use their own tools to debug their own products. Does anyone realize how completely messed up this is????
I wish Apple would stop messing with the UI of Xcode, and simply make their debugger work. The debugger is so broken...
Improving the debugger is exactly what they are doing. What do you think LLDB is all about? The truth is that GCC and GDB are a pain to deal with. They're designed as command line tools and weren't designed with Obj-c in mind.
You're making the assumption that the folks working to improve the workflow would be the same guys working on debugger. Bug compiler/debugger folks are not typically UI types. So it happens in parallel.
As a developer, I think it is important for Apple to keep improving their workflow (along with their performance of core tools like compiler/debugger). And that appears to be exactly what they have done with Xcode. The LLVM compiler is really, really fast compared to GCC (even on 3.2). The added support for C++ is useful to a lot of people. And it sounds like the new LLDB will also be really fast compared to GDB.
Just to clarify, the proper capitalization is capital X, small c. See product About box.
I know there is a tendency to use camel-case by default among developers, especially if you are new to the platform -- but the name is not camel-cased.
Now the XCode editor finally catches up to Visual Studio, Eclipse, and Netbeans. The code completion and debugging was inferior to those IDEs. Now Apple is applying a formula that works, which is the single window view of the other IDEs.
Still, they managed to also come up with at least one brand-new idea. The code and GUI side-by-side view is something I haven't seen, but is a fantastic idea.
Debugging has nothing to do with side-by-side all-in-one views. It has to do with the debugging tools being intelligent.
LLDB is a leap forward and as it grows not only Apple but all LLVM based platforms will benefit from improved solutions.
Now the XCode editor finally catches up to Visual Studio, Eclipse, and Netbeans. The code completion and debugging was inferior to those IDEs. Now Apple is applying a formula that works, which is the single window view of the other IDEs.
Still, they managed to also come up with at least one brand-new idea. The code and GUI side-by-side view is something I haven't seen, but is a fantastic idea.
As a heavy 10 year Visual Studio user, Xcode has been better in code completion and debugging by far since Xcode 3. I abhor Eclipse. Its horrendous.
I learned the hardway not to do Python development in XCode. It got really nasty before I realized I could rely on indentation. So I understand what you are asking here, but can't answer your question.
Maybe it's just me, but I find the notion of a language that depends on indentation as syntax deeply disturbing.
So maybe lot's of Mac/iOS developers are going to hate this.
From what little I've seen of it so far, I think it'll be ok for iOS developers, but I'm not sure the all in one thing will work so well for Mac development, so, hopefully it's still an option to not have it all in one. Although, better integration of Project Builder and Interface Builder sounds like a good thing, in general.
Do we ever wonder why there are less than 50 really amazing iPad apps, and the rest are just filler? Is there really that little imagination in the world? I think it's because most App Store developers are amateurs. The professionals find that Apple tools do not follow the standards of their profession and lose interest in the platform. I think the Xcode team need to get out more.
Actually, I think the reason that most apps are not "amazing" on any platform (and I don't think iOS is any different here, except perhaps that there are more developers total than some platforms) is that there really aren't that many developers who are amazing. In any field, there aren't that many people who are amazing, and there are almost always fewer than think they are. There really is that little imagination in the world, combined with the skill and knowledge to turn it into something amazing.
Comments
Where are the videos located?
In the WWDC 2010 Sessions Videos which you have to be a Developer member.
In the WWDC 2010 Sessions Videos which you have to be a Developer member.
To be clear, unpaid members can grab them, too.
I've been working on an app for a whole year+! Over a year! Am I just stupid or is this stuff difficult... (don't answer that!)
I dint know, is this a "hello world" app?
Dave
Not new at all. The Lotus Designer tool has this type of interface, and has for years. It's a very intuitive interface in a three pane view, with app events and objects in the left, the GUI in the top right pane, and the code in the bottom right. I'm VERY happy that they've done this. I was having a very hard time adapting to XCode as everything I seemed to need was somewhere else in the GUI. This is a very welcome change.
I haven't seen XCode 4 yet but will take your account in mind when trying to adjust to it.
Although I find adapting to C very easy, I'm having a horrible time of it trying to figure out how to link GUI to code, where it was dead simple in the Lotus Designer. Hopefully this will make things easier. I can't stick in a command prompt for my code forever and now that I've branched out, I'm getting lost.
Frankly I've never seen anything as ugly as ugly as the combo of XCode and interface builder. I've never gotten the hang of it and have found that building an interface in code is often easier. The platform is just completely unlike just about every IDE out there and for the life of me I don't know why it is so complex.
Of course it might not be complex but rather I haven't oriented my mind to it. It's possible but I blame that on the lack of any good tutorials that explain what is going on. It is almost like Apple doesn't want you to know how the damn thing works. It is just a disgusting piece of software.
Dave
To be clear, unpaid members can grab them, too.
To be perfectly clear, an unpaid member is still a member.
Will there finally be support for python scripts and debugging in xcode?
I learned the hardway not to do Python development in XCode. It got really nasty before I realized I could rely on indentation. So I understand what you are asking here, but can't answer your question.
Ruby might be supported though as Apple seems to be very fond of that language. MacRuby has come a long way and is supported in XCode today. Frankly I don't know if Apple has long term goals for Python but it is obvious that Ruby is being looked after.
In any event I'd like to extend your question by asking what is the condition of Fortran support? No I don't have any intention of using it myself, it is just a desire to support open source software that uses Fortran.
Dave
Frankly I've never seen anything as ugly as ugly as the combo of XCode and interface builder. I've never gotten the hang of it and have found that building an interface in code is often easier. The platform is just completely unlike just about every IDE out there and for the life of me I don't know why it is so complex.
Of course it might not be complex but rather I haven't oriented my mind to it. It's possible but I blame that on the lack of any good tutorials that explain what is going on. It is almost like Apple doesn't want you to know how the damn thing works. It is just a disgusting piece of software.
I think the guys over at Apress for example, and the thousands of us that use it would suggest otherwise.
To be clear, unpaid members can grab them, too.
Thanks, that is good info.
However, all that being said, at the same time as me thinking this is great there starting to catch up. Whenever I've had the conversation of XCode sucks compared to Visual Studio, I've always respected the fact that it's a different type of development and the people want their tools to work in different ways. So maybe lot's of Mac/iOS developers are going to hate this. Hope not as that would also mean my side of the argument was right and Visual Studio rules compared to XCode but only time will tell.
It must be a hell of a great program then, or you judge way too superficially.
Perhaps Xcode is the only IDE you have used for a long time. Because if you regularly used Eclipse, Visual Studio and common text editors like UltraEdit, you would know exactly what I was talking about.
The programs mentioned above are the "gold standard" .NET and Java IDEs, which are the languages used by the majority of companies, and therefore the majority of developers. And through some "invisible hand" these IDEs (and common programmer editors) have settled on some de facto standards about what things are called ("scripts" not "schemes") and common key shortcuts (e.g. TAB to autocomplete). There are even common window layouts where logs are always in a certain place on the screen relative to the code, as are class hierarchies.
So when a professional developer downloads Xcode at home to see what all the fuss is about, it seems to him that everything is needlessly renamed and moved around. And not the kind of "pleasant surprise" difference that comes from innovation (which everyone must be in favor of), but the frustrating difference that comes from the pseudo-innovation of changing the name of something.
Then 3 hours later this professional developer, who has solved problems for many organizations, and could probably write some great iPhone apps, throws up his hands and says "What a POS," and goes back to what he was doing. Do we ever wonder why there are less than 50 really amazing iPad apps, and the rest are just filler? Is there really that little imagination in the world? I think it's because most App Store developers are amateurs. The professionals find that Apple tools do not follow the standards of their profession and lose interest in the platform. I think the Xcode team need to get out more.
Ruby might be supported though as Apple seems to be very fond of that language. MacRuby has come a long way and is supported in XCode today. Frankly I don't know if Apple has long term goals for Python but it is obvious that Ruby is being looked after.
This link to the Scottish Ruby Conf. makes it quite clear that MacRuby is likely to have a role to play in both Mac OS and iOS development.
http://bit.ly/b0rxMi
Perhaps Xcode is the only IDE you have used for a long time. Because if you regularly used Eclipse, Visual Studio and common text editors like UltraEdit, you would know exactly what I was talking about.
The programs mentioned above are the "gold standard" .NET and Java IDEs, which are the languages used by the majority of companies, and therefore the majority of developers. And through some "invisible hand" these IDEs (and common programmer editors) have settled on some de facto standards about what things are called ("scripts" not "schemes") and common key shortcuts (e.g. TAB to autocomplete). There are even common window layouts where logs are always in a certain place on the screen relative to the code, as are class hierarchies.
So when a professional developer downloads Xcode at home to see what all the fuss is about, it seems to him that everything is needlessly renamed and moved around. And not the kind of "pleasant surprise" difference that comes from innovation (which everyone must be in favor of), but the frustrating difference that comes from the pseudo-innovation of changing the name of something.
Then 3 hours later this professional developer, who has solved problems for many organizations, and could probably write some great iPhone apps, throws up his hands and says "What a POS," and goes back to what he was doing. Do we ever wonder why there are less than 50 really amazing iPad apps, and the rest are just filler? Is there really that little imagination in the world? I think it's because most App Store developers are amateurs. The professionals find that Apple tools do not follow the standards of their profession and lose interest in the platform. I think the Xcode team need to get out more.
Looking at the fact, that the device is just sold for two month 50 really amazing iPad Apps is huge.
I haven't seen 50 really amazing Java, .Net Apps (like e.g. iWork, Omnigraffle, 3D-Games etc. ) on a comparable device until now. So some Pros seem to be able to deal with it while Java and .Net aren't a free ticket for pro applications.
I also have a hard time to get used to XCode although I'm developing software for many years. I can understand your pain and I have great hopes for XCode 4.
That aside it's no good style to degrade other developers which are able to deal with it as amateurs in order to emphasize yourself as pro.
I haven't seen any of your applications, but I instantly hope that it's not only your arrogance that can be labeled as pro.
And, least anyone think I'm just venting, I had a friend that went to work for Apple on Final Cut Pro. I asked him "Hey, how do you deal with the fact that Xcode's debugger is so broken?" He said "We mostly just use printfs." This is an Apple engineer, admitting that they can't even use their own tools to debug their own products. Does anyone realize how completely messed up this is????
I wish Apple would stop messing with the UI of Xcode, and simply make their debugger work. The debugger is so broken...
Improving the debugger is exactly what they are doing. What do you think LLDB is all about? The truth is that GCC and GDB are a pain to deal with. They're designed as command line tools and weren't designed with Obj-c in mind.
You're making the assumption that the folks working to improve the workflow would be the same guys working on debugger. Bug compiler/debugger folks are not typically UI types. So it happens in parallel.
As a developer, I think it is important for Apple to keep improving their workflow (along with their performance of core tools like compiler/debugger). And that appears to be exactly what they have done with Xcode. The LLVM compiler is really, really fast compared to GCC (even on 3.2). The added support for C++ is useful to a lot of people. And it sounds like the new LLDB will also be really fast compared to GDB.
I know there is a tendency to use camel-case by default among developers, especially if you are new to the platform -- but the name is not camel-cased.
Now the XCode editor finally catches up to Visual Studio, Eclipse, and Netbeans. The code completion and debugging was inferior to those IDEs. Now Apple is applying a formula that works, which is the single window view of the other IDEs.
Still, they managed to also come up with at least one brand-new idea. The code and GUI side-by-side view is something I haven't seen, but is a fantastic idea.
Debugging has nothing to do with side-by-side all-in-one views. It has to do with the debugging tools being intelligent.
LLDB is a leap forward and as it grows not only Apple but all LLVM based platforms will benefit from improved solutions.
http://lldb.llvm.org/features.html
Now the XCode editor finally catches up to Visual Studio, Eclipse, and Netbeans. The code completion and debugging was inferior to those IDEs. Now Apple is applying a formula that works, which is the single window view of the other IDEs.
Still, they managed to also come up with at least one brand-new idea. The code and GUI side-by-side view is something I haven't seen, but is a fantastic idea.
As a heavy 10 year Visual Studio user, Xcode has been better in code completion and debugging by far since Xcode 3. I abhor Eclipse. Its horrendous.
I learned the hardway not to do Python development in XCode. It got really nasty before I realized I could rely on indentation. So I understand what you are asking here, but can't answer your question.
Maybe it's just me, but I find the notion of a language that depends on indentation as syntax deeply disturbing.
So maybe lot's of Mac/iOS developers are going to hate this.
From what little I've seen of it so far, I think it'll be ok for iOS developers, but I'm not sure the all in one thing will work so well for Mac development, so, hopefully it's still an option to not have it all in one. Although, better integration of Project Builder and Interface Builder sounds like a good thing, in general.
Do we ever wonder why there are less than 50 really amazing iPad apps, and the rest are just filler? Is there really that little imagination in the world? I think it's because most App Store developers are amateurs. The professionals find that Apple tools do not follow the standards of their profession and lose interest in the platform. I think the Xcode team need to get out more.
Actually, I think the reason that most apps are not "amazing" on any platform (and I don't think iOS is any different here, except perhaps that there are more developers total than some platforms) is that there really aren't that many developers who are amazing. In any field, there aren't that many people who are amazing, and there are almost always fewer than think they are. There really is that little imagination in the world, combined with the skill and knowledge to turn it into something amazing.