[HN Gopher] 10x C++ Editor
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       10x C++ Editor
        
       Author : davikr
       Score  : 184 points
       Date   : 2023-01-03 14:33 UTC (8 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (10xeditor.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (10xeditor.com)
        
       | hoistbypetard wrote:
       | This feels super-spammy.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | nice__two wrote:
       | Did anyone try opening LibreOffice master in it?
       | 
       | LO has a reputation as an IDE-killer, as it's so large and
       | complex.
        
         | heywhatupboys wrote:
         | I hope it is shorter than the startup time for LO itself
        
         | Zenity wrote:
         | This got me curious, so I gave it a try. It opens instantly (as
         | always) and parsing the complete codebase in the background
         | took about two minutes. After that everything is practically
         | instant and there is no problem searching through the code,
         | finding references, code completion, etc. Reopening the project
         | is also instant and it takes less than ten seconds to fully
         | load the cache in the background. Since I don't know the code I
         | can't really comment on whether everything got parsed
         | correctly, but the random bits I tried seemed to be right.
         | 
         | This doesn't seem to be worse than the Unreal codebase, which
         | 10x also handles with ease. I highly doubt that there is a
         | codebase in existence which could bring 10x to its knees. It
         | does use quite a bit of memory, but nothing a modern setup
         | shouldn't be able to handle. Currently it seems to be about 4GB
         | for both Unreal and LO each, with LO being just slightly
         | larger.
         | 
         | This of course are extreme cases, so you can imagine what
         | performance for "normal" projects is like.
        
       | synergy20 wrote:
       | how is it better than vim, or vscode, or clion to qualify itself
       | as 10x?
        
         | synergy20 wrote:
         | I don't know why is this downvoted, a genuine question from me
         | actually, if it's truly revolutionary and helpful I'm willing
         | to purchase then.
        
           | fhd2 wrote:
           | Can't tell why you're downvoted either - could have been a
           | bit more constructive, like your second post, I guess.
           | 
           | Otherwise I agree: 10x certainly invokes the mythical "10x
           | programmer" to me, but looking through the list of features,
           | it's pretty basic. USP seems to be speed, probably competing
           | against the heavy IDEs, not Emacs and Vim. But getting there
           | took some guesswork, the website didn't answer these
           | questions well for me.
        
           | AlchemistCamp wrote:
           | I downvoted the comment because the article explicitly
           | mentioned speed, which VS Code and Clion both struggle with.
           | Either the gp didn't read TFA or didn't have experience with
           | the kinds of code bases it discussed.
        
             | synergy20 wrote:
             | well I spent a few minutes checking its website and could
             | not find that 'speed' keyword, plus I don't have a speed
             | issue with vscode and clion though I don't use them often,
             | as I'm a vim user.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | stan680 wrote:
       | I've been using this fulltime for a few months so I can provide
       | some perspective from real-world experience:
       | 
       | Firstly, on speed, I really recommend giving it a try. There's
       | things like launch time / time to syntax highlighting which are
       | nice to have and make it a joy to use but then there's things
       | like _instant_ 'Find References' and workspace search that I
       | think contribute to a qualitative difference to the way I work -
       | I simply would not use these features as much or in the same way
       | if they took seconds (as they do in VS).
       | 
       | Seen some discussion comparing to things like Sublime - 10x
       | understands c++ code much much better than sublime and that's
       | crucial for making some of its best features like 'Rename' and
       | 'Find references' work so well.
       | 
       | The other thing I think is worth mentioning is just how active
       | and responsive the developer is. Bug-fixes and improvements often
       | get implemented within hours of reporting. As an example, I've
       | always been annoyed by how impossible it is to make VS do 'tabs
       | for indentation, spaces for alignment' - after a brief
       | discussion, this got sorted in 10x quickly. I think that's a
       | serious advantage over Visual Studio, that often has annoying
       | issues/bugs languishing for literally years.
        
         | jimmaswell wrote:
         | > make VS do 'tabs for indentation, spaces for alignment'
         | 
         | Using an editorconfig file I never had an issue doing this. I
         | get a tab if I hit tab and a space if I hit space.
        
         | olig15 wrote:
         | I'm a heavy Visual Studio user (work for a AAA game dev, C++),
         | and find VS without extensions horrible to use, but after
         | Installing the 'Visual Assist' (which seems to be an industry
         | standard in game dev at this point) extension it gives me all
         | of the advantages you mentioned. Have you tried using this
         | (admittedly paid for) extension?
        
           | Zenity wrote:
           | What got me into 10x is actually how similar the default
           | setup is to Visual Assist (including default shortcuts). And
           | since it supports Visual Studio solutions, 10x will just work
           | out of the box with any Unreal project or many other similar
           | large C++ projects. You could even switch back and forth
           | without a problem while evaluating 10x, which is what I did
           | the first couple of months or so when I started using it. It
           | has already come a long way since then though, and I've been
           | using 10x exclusively for quite a few months now (full time
           | working on an Unreal project and some personal side
           | projects). The developer is a former game dev himself, so he
           | understands our particular needs quite well and is very
           | responsive to them. The fact that 10x can easily manage those
           | kind of codebases is what really differentiates it from other
           | "lightweight" text editors in my book. Building and debugging
           | still goes through Visual Studio for VS projects (with good
           | integration and no required setup), so switching causes no
           | disruption.
           | 
           | Compared to Visual Assist it may not have all the bells and
           | whistles yes, but especially the code navigation (which to me
           | is the most important aspect) and code completion is quite
           | advanced already and incredibly fast, even compared to Visual
           | Assist. Parsing the entire UE4 codebase for the first time
           | (in the background) takes a couple of minutes. Opening it
           | from cache is practically instant, all search operations /
           | code completion are also near instant with no stalls
           | whatsoever. In terms of refactoring it is more limited, but
           | renaming symbols works well and that covers about 99% of the
           | cases were I regularly use refactoring tools anyway.
           | 
           | And unlike Visual Studio or JetBrains IDEs, 10x is so fast
           | and lightweight that I would like to use it for all of my
           | text editing needs. That makes customizing it much more
           | satisfying as well, which is quite easy to do with a
           | straightforward Python API.
           | 
           | As you can probably tell I really love this editor, it has
           | had a quite dramatic impact on my enjoyment of work already.
           | It won't be for everybody (and it doesn't try to), but I
           | would encourage everybody to give it a try. If it is the kind
           | of editor you are looking for, I think you will be very happy
           | with it.
        
           | jim90 wrote:
           | Yeah, I have been a VAX user for years... took me 15 minutes
           | of testing out 10x before I purchased it.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | xrayarx wrote:
       | Which version(s) of c++ does the 10x parser support?
       | 
       | Are there independent performance measurements?
       | 
       | What are your reference projects for "largest projects"?
       | 
       | Which GUI Toolkit do you use?
       | 
       | Do you support LSP?
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | pulse7 wrote:
       | Please fix broken links on the license site
       | (https://10xeditor.com/License.htm)...
        
       | xrayarx wrote:
       | It seems that there is no unique selling proposition. Practically
       | any editor can do this for any language. Also there are many free
       | editors, that fulfil the requirements.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | anilcanglk wrote:
       | it is rapid fast and efficient to use. I've been using it for one
       | year
        
       | artisanspam wrote:
       | It would be nice if the website put the donation links below the
       | demo images instead of having them be the first thing you see.
       | That was a big turn off when I first loaded the page.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | reisse wrote:
       | As a C++ developer, I don't really see how it is going to compete
       | against VS Code + LSP, Visual Studio, or even CLion.
       | 
       | From my experience, if you work on C++ codebase large enough that
       | indexing it is a problem, compiling and linking it is a problem
       | of the same order. And as you need beefy hardware to compile and
       | link your code anyway, you can reuse the same hardware for
       | indexing and editing.
       | 
       | Sure, VS Code + LSP may be dog slow on a typical "power
       | consumption-optimized crappy business laptop" like T-series or
       | X-series ThinkPads, but on such hardware, even if I had fast code
       | editor, it'd be a pain to develop due to very long compile times
       | anyway. And on a 12c20t workstation with 64 gigs of RAM any
       | editor works like a charm. Yes, `clangd` eats 20 threads and 20
       | gigs of RAM for indexing, but go to definition works instantly,
       | and I don't really care about hardware resources.
       | 
       | Then, parsing C++ properly is really hard. Even JetBrains had to
       | admit it as they've integrated clang++ frontend into the CLion. I
       | don't believe that one person can create both a good code editor
       | and a fully compliant C++ parser. Maybe they piggyback on EDG or
       | clang++ frontends, but from their website it seems that
       | everything is written from scratch.
       | 
       | Another problem I see is that very few of large codebases are
       | C++-only. Usually it's some C++, some Python (or Perl, if the
       | code is old enough) scripts, maybe some Java interop code, few Go
       | tools, with a bit of Lua on top. And a lot of make/CMake/whatever
       | build system files. "Big" IDEs and editors either support all of
       | that from the box or have plugins to fill the gaps. I don't know
       | if the paid-only closed-source product can gain traction big
       | enough to have a vibrant plugin community.
        
         | forrestthewoods wrote:
         | > As a C++ developer, I don't really see how it is going to
         | compete against VS Code + LSP, Visual Studio, or even CLion.
         | 
         | Easy, it's better than all of them!
         | 
         | If you're a C++ developer on Windows then I encourage you to
         | simply try it. I run a 32c/64t threadripper so I also don't
         | particularly care about hardware resources. My experience on a
         | custom C++ codebase and Unreal Engine codebase is that 10x is
         | faster and more reliable than VS Code, Visual Studio, and
         | Rider. I haven't tried CLion as Rider is the JetBrains tool for
         | UE.
         | 
         | I agree lack of support for other languages is a bummer. I'm
         | hoping support will be added if the tool takes off. Maybe he
         | ads LSP support, I dunno.
         | 
         | > parsing C++ properly is really hard
         | 
         | I'm genuinely blown away he wrote a custom parser that works.
         | Unreal Engine is big and nasty and full of a kajillion macros.
         | My experience thus far is that 10x handles it like a champ.
         | Better than Visual Studio. And equal or better than Rider.
         | Super super impressive.
        
           | thewebcount wrote:
           | > on Windows
           | 
           | They might want to mention that somewhere on the page. I
           | spent time reading about it only to find out when I tried to
           | download it that it doesn't support my OS.
        
         | stewartlynch8 wrote:
         | The way I see 10x competing is by general speed and
         | responsiveness, and the robustness of the parser. The parser
         | may not be fully C++ compliant, but it is dependable and scales
         | well.
         | 
         | I don't want to be specific here, but my experiences with some
         | other IDEs is that they can stall, lock up and operations can
         | take seconds to complete regardless of the hardware. All this
         | can break the flow. I think you really have to try 10x on a
         | large project to notice the difference. The instance search
         | feature alone can be a game changer.
         | 
         | > I don't believe that one person can create both a good code
         | editor and a fully compliant C++ parser
         | 
         | Believe me, I question this myself almost every day. A small
         | hobby project turned into a 6 year marathon and here we are.
         | The parser will probably never be fully compliant, but
         | hopefully it's good enough for most code. And the speed and
         | robustness will hopefully compensate for this.
         | 
         | > Another problem I see is that very few of large codebases are
         | C++ only
         | 
         | Even though I market 10x as a C++ editor, it has syntax
         | highlighting for many other languages. And you can add more
         | languages using the regex system. I'll hopefully be adding some
         | parsing for other languages after the 1.0 launch.
        
         | _gabe_ wrote:
         | I have a PC with 48GB of RAM, RTX 2080, Intel i7-9700K, and
         | Visual Studio _still_ lags a lot of the time for me. Also,
         | Visual Studio doesn 't support renaming by reference out of the
         | box. You can install ReSharper, but then it slows things down
         | even _more_.
         | 
         | > As a C++ developer, I don't really see how it is going to
         | compete against VS Code + LSP, Visual Studio, or even CLion.
         | 
         | If it's fast and supports these basic features that literally
         | every other language already supports, then it's already
         | beating Visual Studio. I haven't used CLion so I can't comment
         | there, and VSCode was a pain trying to set up, so if this
         | supports integration with cmake and automatically configured
         | everything, then that's a win in my book.
         | 
         | Edit: I also hate these doom and gloom comments that basically
         | say "nobody can beat big Corp Microsoft, Google, etc. Why
         | bother trying...". What purpose does this comment serve? I'm
         | sure the author is much more aware of how difficult this
         | problem is then the people who aren't even attempting to solve
         | it. All the power to him and I hope he succeeds because some
         | other editors/IDEs for C++ would be _great_.
        
           | darknavi wrote:
           | > VSCode was a pain trying to set up, so if this supports
           | integration with cmake and automatically configured
           | everything, then that's a win in my book.
           | 
           | Not sure the last time you tried, but VS Code does support
           | cmake (perhaps with extensions?).
        
       | forrestthewoods wrote:
       | Lots of comments from people here who haven't tried the editor.
       | I've been using it full time for about a month, so here are some
       | assorted thoughts.
       | 
       | I don't use vim or emacs. I probably never will. Sorry.
       | 
       | This editor is made for C++ game devs on Windows. If you are a
       | C++ gamedev on Windows then it is likely the best editor in the
       | market. An example of this is it has integrated Perforce support
       | but not Git.
       | 
       | 10x can open .sln files natively and invoke its builds. Very
       | slick.
       | 
       | I'm pretty sure 10x is the best editor on market for Unreal
       | Engine projects. It's so much faster then Visual Studio or Rider.
       | 
       | It has a custom C++ parser. It's the fastest and most reliable
       | one I've come across. It blows my mind.
       | 
       | The solo dev is _insanely_ responsive. I filed a bug on GitHub
       | and he responded in literally one minute (I checked the time
       | stamps). He sent me a custom debug build which I ran out o get
       | info and had a crash fix published to the world in under 30
       | minutes. Stellar stuff.
       | 
       | The downsides:
       | 
       | it's just a C++ editor for Windows and it does have bugs.
       | 
       | It's not a debugger, just a text editor. I've been using RemedyBG
       | which is good, but not as far along as 10x.
       | 
       | Support for additional languages is listed as a possibility for
       | the future. I will keep using it happily for C++. If in the
       | future it supported more languages to the same level of quality
       | that would be awesome.
        
       | tkuraku wrote:
       | The monthly cost is kind of a nonstarter for me. The sublime text
       | model seems like a good alternative. ~$100 for ~3 years of
       | updates with perpetual ownership of the latest version at the end
       | of your subscription.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | Zenity wrote:
         | The monthly cost is for supporters and to get priority support
         | on Discord (absolutely worth it IMO given how fast the dev
         | responds to issues and requests). AFAIK the final pricing model
         | for the release is not decided yet.
        
       | sam0x17 wrote:
       | Some web design advice: I looked for a tab called "Screenshots",
       | didn't find one, didn't find any general info about what this is
       | other than the buy now stuff, so I hit the Back button.
       | 
       | Edit: I re-visited and scrolled down past what I thought was the
       | end of the page only to find everything I was looking for. This
       | is the problem with these huge scrolling marketing pages. You
       | gotta lead with the content and then try to sell me at the
       | bottom.
        
         | detrites wrote:
         | Exact same thing happened here. Only went back because I saw
         | your comment.
        
           | sam0x17 wrote:
           | Yeah, I think people take "single page application" a little
           | too literally these days
        
         | DrewADesign wrote:
         | Yeah. These folks should probably hire a designer. They clearly
         | put a lot of fancy looking elements in it to attempt to
         | replicate the look of a designed page, but that's not how it
         | works. Many developers think design is like air freshener for a
         | page-- an aesthetic improvement based on personal preference
         | and taste that's distantly secondary to the _real content._ But
         | colors, relationships between elements, placement of elements,
         | and all of those things communicate about your product. If they
         | 're inexpertly or sloppily put together, it communicates that
         | your product is inexpertly or sloppily put together _well
         | before they visually parse your copy and screenshots._
         | 
         | Here's a free first impression breakdown for them: A page's
         | social media link stripe is commonly at the bottom of the page
         | as a final "ok you're not going to buy this right now, but at
         | least keep us in mind" call to action, or at the very top of a
         | page as a nav element. Gray is a common color for page terminal
         | stripes or other perfunctory, de-emphasized components because
         | nothing stands out against it as much as it would stand out
         | against something else. Pricing schemes are either on a
         | standalone page or at least after some introduction explains
         | what they are. Seeing the gray stripe of social media links
         | under the pricing block is like a stop sign to your brain.
         | Beyond that, the "more options" button at the bottom of the
         | page only reveals more options at the top of the page. The
         | section of tiny screenshots half covered up with those boxes in
         | that same "not important" gray is very off-putting. Not only
         | does varying shades of gray text on white or various shades of
         | gray background scream "don't pay attention to me," it's
         | irritating to read, and their #969696 text on white on the
         | purchase page even fails WCAG AA color contrast guidelines for
         | headlines. Many elements are slightly misaligned. The complete
         | lack of visual hierarchy beyond the project name and purchase
         | section title leads users to subconsciously say "not worth the
         | cognitive load to figure out what's going on here," and
         | leave... and that was a sub 5-minute analysis.
         | 
         | Most bounced users don't consciously think about why they left.
         | They'll never complain about it because they'll never think
         | about you again. There's a damn good reason big businesses put
         | a lot of time and resources into that stuff, and as much as
         | folks like to think otherwise, having developers as your
         | customers doesn't change that. Developer-targeted FOSS projects
         | get away with undesigned websites because it's _free as in
         | speech,_ and most people are probably looking at the very
         | thoughtfully designed Github, et al interface instead. Even
         | subconsciously, broken buttons, misaligned elements,
         | uncomfortably obfuscated elements, and miscommunication of
         | navigation cues through poor color choice does not communicate
         | "high-quality paid software product that beats the vast array
         | of free competition."
        
           | stewartlynch8 wrote:
           | Thanks for this advice. I'm currently in the process or re-
           | doing the website and this is really useful feedback.
           | Hopefully a lot of these issues have already been addressed.
           | I'll be uploading the new site in a day or two.
           | 
           | The sudden activity on this site kind of took me by surprise,
           | I wasn't quite ready for the big reveal.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | tejohnso wrote:
       | > The 10x philosophy: Every operation, from opening projects to
       | searching for text should be instant.
       | 
       | You can get that with basic VIM and some grepping shortcuts.
       | Maybe I'm just not working in sufficiently large code bases. But
       | shouldn't a C++ specific editor have some philosophy that is
       | specific to C++? Like awareness of ownership semantics for syntax
       | / lint checks? Maybe not the best example, but "be fast" doesn't
       | seem like a great differentiator.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | ljw1004 wrote:
         | I presume it means things like "does cross-file go-to-def and
         | find-all-references work instantly after opening a file?" In
         | most IDEs these things take seconds or minutes to become
         | available, depending on project size
        
         | steeleduncan wrote:
         | I think at this point speed is a great differentiator.
         | 
         | I've been happy with the featureset and design of all C++ IDEs
         | I've tried for a decade or so now, but they never seem to get
         | any faster. An IDE designed specifically for speed, with an
         | ongoing committment to keep it fast, solves the biggest issue I
         | have with C++ coding right now.
        
       | nine_k wrote:
       | What instantly jumps at me is the fact that the software is
       | subscription-based, with a monthly cost. Small, admittedly, if
       | you're in the US, or maybe in Switzerland, and have a job (not a
       | student, etc).
       | 
       | I'm more and more reluctant to admit _any_ tools that are not
       | open-source into my long-term stack. And a text editor is usually
       | a very long-term commitment: you want to commit it to your muscle
       | memory, and most of your daily development workflow hinges on the
       | editor.
        
         | fasterik wrote:
         | I thought the same thing at first (the website could be
         | clearer). But it's actually a free beta. The subscription is
         | there for people who want to help fund development and get
         | priority support.
        
       | lholden wrote:
       | I love seeing new editors come up. Always curious to see what
       | people have planned for them. With that said... I do have to say
       | that the landing page for this was a turn off for me.
       | 
       | Digging through the landing page, the focus seems to be on how to
       | support it and there just isn't enough time spent talking about
       | why this project is cool or worth supporting.
       | 
       | From what I can gleam from the page this seems to have a GPU
       | backed renderer and have fast startup times. It seems intended
       | for C++ but doesn't really talk about C++ specific features. (Ex,
       | CMake integration, integration with doctest/catch/etc).
       | 
       | The one C++ specific thing it mentions is "full C++ parser for
       | syntax highlighting, autocomplete, goto-definition, find
       | references and a lot more". Does this support C++20? Is it using
       | it's own engine for this or is integrating with clang or
       | something similar. What is this doing that all of the other
       | editors with C++ syntax support don't have?
       | 
       | I consider CLion to be a "gold standard" for features and
       | functionality as a editor/IDE for C++. The only thing it doesn't
       | do for me is "be fast and light". I'm also a long time VIM user
       | and I generally default to VIM when I want something "fast and
       | light".
       | 
       | If there was an editor/ide that had many of the features of CLion
       | and the speed of VIM, I would certainly consider that to be
       | "10x".
        
         | Zenity wrote:
         | Yes it is using its own parsing engine. The developer is
         | prioritizing the most common language features but also
         | constantly working on adding more edge cases as people run into
         | them. The parser is designed to do a sensible thing in all
         | cases, so while occasionally it may not get it perfectly right
         | (yet), that doesn't break the parser completely.
         | 
         | What this custom solution is doing that others don't is simply
         | that it is incredibly fast. You really need to try it to fully
         | appreciate this though, especially on large codebases it makes
         | a significant difference. Not just because it never lags or
         | stalls while working, but also because it makes it much less
         | painful to work with those codebases if you can instantly find
         | and jump to anything.
         | 
         | The speed and simplicity is the main selling point, but unlike
         | other lightweight editors it doesn't achieve this simply by
         | being "less". From my perspective the main selling point is
         | that it is a lightweight and performant editor that can
         | actually replace Visual Studio + VAX / JetBrains for game
         | developers (especially Unreal Engine projects and comparably
         | large codebases). For that use case there just isn't anything
         | comparable on the market right now.
         | 
         | Whether it is equally useful in other scenarios already
         | (especially if you are happy with your current setup) I can't
         | really judge, and I would agree that the website could do a
         | much better job selling it. The developer is still updating the
         | website often, but his priority is working on the actual app of
         | course and he is doing everything by himself from what I can
         | tell.
         | 
         | In a nutshell, right now I would say that 10x is mainly a great
         | choice for game developers. But that's only because that is
         | where its strengths are most unique right now, not because it
         | is intended to be only that. It still isn't even fully released
         | yet, and I think it has a lot of potential to be much more than
         | "just" a performant editor for game developers.
        
         | stewartlynch8 wrote:
         | Please don't judge the website too harshly. I agree it doesn't
         | communicate what 10x is very well and isn't very professional.
         | I'm currently working on an update that I'll be uploading in
         | the next day or two. I wasn't quite ready for a big announce
         | yet, but I'm pleased more people are discovering 10x.
         | 
         | > If there was an editor/ide that had many of the features of
         | CLion and the speed of VIM, I would certainly consider that to
         | be "10x".
         | 
         | This is exactly what 10x is meant to be. Whether it has enough
         | features yet is up to you to judge. Everyone needs a different
         | set of features, but if it has the features you need then I
         | hope it lives up to its name.
         | 
         | I've written the parser myself, but I haven't been keeping
         | track of exactly what version of C++ is supported. The C++ spec
         | is incredibly complex. Over the last 6 years I've been adding
         | things as they are requested. The good thing about the parser
         | is that it will skip anything it doesn't understand and
         | continue on. This sounds bad, but it actually works out very
         | well. It will do a pretty good job of most things you throw at
         | it. The best thing is to try it and see. If you need specific
         | support for something, let me know and I'll see what I can do.
        
           | monkeycantype wrote:
           | Hello Stewart, I think the only addition I would want to the
           | website is an _about page_ with a few paragraphs to explain
           | your motivation and goals. Without that entry point, I was
           | clicking through, feeling like 10x was something I might be
           | interested in but not really sure what it was.
        
         | czx4f4bd wrote:
         | This is one of my biggest gripes with a lot of open source
         | [edit: and also non-open source] projects. It's sort of
         | baffling to me when I come across a project that the
         | maintainers clearly want to be used, but there's no clear and
         | concise explanation of what the project is, why you'd want to
         | use it, and how it compares with major alternatives.
        
           | _kst_ wrote:
           | Agreed. I've seen too many README files that summarize the
           | changes in the latest release without explaining what the
           | project is or what it's for. (I don't have a specific
           | example, which _might_ imply that the problem isn 't as bad
           | as I remember it being.)
        
           | stewartlynch8 wrote:
           | Point taken. I'm currently working on a new website and I'll
           | try and I'll try and address these issues.
           | 
           | It's simply down to time, I spend most of my time working on
           | making 10x better. Because it's still in Beta I haven't
           | focused on the website much.
        
           | __float wrote:
           | Do note that this project isn't open source: for something
           | like an editor, this is a bit of a negative for me since it
           | significantly reduces how it can be customized if need be.
        
             | czx4f4bd wrote:
             | Oops. Thanks for the correction. I only lightly skimmed the
             | project page, so I think the "Support 10x Development"
             | header made me assume it was an open source project asking
             | for donations.
             | 
             | That said, I'm not really sure why I specified "open
             | source" since my gripe definitely goes for any software
             | project, and probably doubly so for commercial ones, since
             | those actually need a literal sales pitch to convince
             | potential users of their value proposition.
        
       | fefe23 wrote:
       | I have no interest in this (happy with vim, developing under
       | Linux) but I installed it anyway and the first impression is
       | absolutely impressive.
       | 
       | The installer is comparatively small. It loads quickly. Doesn't
       | ask any useless questions. Installs quickly. The app also loads
       | quickly and feels snappy.
       | 
       | People tend to underestimate the importance of first impressions.
       | This guy gets it.
       | 
       | Now if this was open source and built and ran on Linux, I'd be
       | interested. _uninstall_ :-)
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | Johanx64 wrote:
         | Who cares in what you'd be interested in after you've clearly
         | stated that you want software to be essentially given away for
         | free?
         | 
         | At that point your desires become 100% irrelevant, nobody
         | cares.
         | 
         | "If this software was given away for free with full access to
         | source and had features X, Y and Z, I'd be interested", like
         | wtf, how can you say this with a straight face?
        
           | jostiniane wrote:
           | Your comment is out of place at so many levels.
           | 
           | First, you don't know there are commercial products being
           | completely open source.
           | 
           | Second, as a user, the one has the right to put their
           | priorities regardless of your irrelevant opinion on them
           | being good or bad.
           | 
           | Finally, I fail to understand the hostility against somebody
           | who simply expressed what they want to see in an editor,
           | something that contributes nicely to the thread, unlike your
           | hostile purely negative comment.
        
             | Johanx64 wrote:
             | > First, you don't know there are commercial products being
             | completely open source.
             | 
             | Cut it out, everbody knows full well how open source works
             | out for small indie, much less one person teams.
             | 
             | It is extremely egocentric to demand for a change of
             | business model which would send the author begging for the
             | next meal on patreon. And then after you've asked "kindly"
             | the author to join the homeless row, you have the gall to
             | ask for additional features or "uninstall" smiley-face.
             | 
             | So no, I do believe the hostility is more than warranted
             | when the author is being pressured/bullied into making
             | decisions which would - statistically speaking - lead to
             | financial ruin.
             | 
             | This wasn't a reply to a reasonable feature request by a
             | paying customer or even potential customer, so no, nothing
             | was contributed by it other than a sheer display of
             | egocentrism and entitlement.
        
               | [deleted]
        
           | chlorion wrote:
           | Free software has nothing to do with money or not paying for
           | a product.
           | 
           | You can educate yourself with the following resource:
           | https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
        
             | IshKebab wrote:
             | It doesn't have _nothing_ to do with it. It 's much easier
             | to sell software if it's closed source. Some people manage
             | to sell open source software but it's obviously pretty hard
             | to compete with some guy who just compiled your software,
             | changed the name and is giving it away for free.
        
       | linhns wrote:
       | For $10 a month (I assume tier 2 is what most people find
       | acceptable for use), what would I get for this editor? No
       | roadmap, not even an about page and the last HN post was from
       | last year so a definite no from me.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | pantalaimon wrote:
       | Does this also work for C?
        
         | Zenity wrote:
         | Yes, with some minor limitations as it receives much less
         | testing. I was using 10x with The Machinery (RIP) for some time
         | and the developer was super responsive fixing any C-specific
         | issues (and even added some TM specific features when I asked
         | nicely). If more people start using it for C and report any
         | issues found, it should get even better.
         | 
         | I would say it may even be better suited for C to some extent
         | since that is a much simpler language with less chances for the
         | parser to get confused by some obscure corner case. C++ really
         | is the worst case scenario for a parsing engine, so once it
         | works reliably for that, support for other languages should
         | also become much more feasible.
        
         | scombridae wrote:
         | It's hard to imagine a C programmer so professionally ignorant
         | that he's yet to realize C++ is a superset of C.
        
           | lowbloodsugar wrote:
           | >It's hard to imagine a C programmer so professionally
           | ignorant that he's yet to realize C++ is a superset of C.
           | 
           | Ooof. restrict keyword enters the chat. C and C++ are two
           | languages that evolve together, but one is not a superset of
           | the other.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | MobiusHorizons wrote:
           | I see this comment a lot, but it's not true (at least not any
           | more). Many valid C programs do not compile through the C++
           | compiler. The standards for C++ and C have deviated over the
           | years.
        
       | TheArcane wrote:
       | What's with every paid software product being a monthly
       | subscription now? I just wanna buy and forget, not be reminded of
       | it every month on my credit card statement.
        
         | andsoitis wrote:
         | I'm fine with software subscriptions (fixes, upgrades, customer
         | support, etc.), but subscribing for something that's still in
         | development (this case) is harder for me to swallow, in
         | principle. On the other hand, it is very little money and you
         | can cancel your subscription at any time so it keeps the
         | developer honest (focus to make the product better and reach
         | 1.0).
         | 
         | What I'm most surprised by is that Visual Studio isn't more
         | than adequate. What does Microsoft use internally?
        
         | witx wrote:
         | I actively dislike the subscription model as well and it's
         | permeating into software products unfortunately.
         | 
         | With this said I actually like Jetbrains' model where you pay
         | something like a subscription but after 12 installments you get
         | to keep the version you've paid for, even if you discontinue
         | the subscription. If you prefer you can pay the full price
         | upfront and you get the same result.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | yellow_lead wrote:
         | > There is no need to pay for a license while 10x is in Beta,
         | you are free to use 10x for whatever you like. Even if you
         | don't become a supporter you can still give feedback and
         | suggestions using the contact form. Your feedback is just as
         | valuable to me and will help to make 10x the best editor
         | possible.
         | 
         | https://10xeditor.com/support_10x.htm
        
         | neomantra wrote:
         | While I understand that sentiment, this appears to be a product
         | from an indie developer. In that regard, it could fit the model
         | of Patreon/OnlyFans rather than Adobe Creative Cloud and
         | Office365.
         | 
         | I actually hope more indie developers do this -- and complement
         | it with live-coding the product development and other neat
         | perks. If it reaches critical mass beyond "fans" and becomes
         | major-version-based sales, then early supporters could get
         | large discounts.
         | 
         | Biggest downside seems to be if the software becomes End-of-
         | Life and End-Of-Access suddenly, for whatever reason, and my
         | workflow is disrupted. Some Open Source Parachute would be cool
         | -- over time, we are all affected by dropped software products,
         | by developers big and small.
        
         | hn_user2 wrote:
         | Agreed. I have put a hard stop on subscribing to any software.
         | Even Jetbrain's products, I'll just purchase outright every few
         | years to get updates.
         | 
         | All those subscriptions add up. And when I buy a product I
         | expect to use it for a very long time (decade +). If I add up
         | those subscription fees it feels incredibly expensive.
         | 
         | I have successfully weened myself off of all my software
         | subscriptions. On a yearly basis it was costing me $1000+ for
         | software. At this point it doesn't matter how good of software
         | it is, I'm moving on if it doesn't have a purchase or lifetime
         | option.
        
         | stewartlynch8 wrote:
         | I understand the resistance to a monthly subscription, but it's
         | the only way I can continue to work on 10x. I've been working
         | on 10x for 6 years now, and even with the generous support from
         | the beta subscribers I can't go on indefinitely like this.
         | Hopefully the subscription will seem worth it with all of the
         | bug fixes and features that are planned. I will continue
         | uploading new versions regularly, as I have been doing:
         | https://10xeditor.com/versions.htm
        
         | karaterobot wrote:
         | They should call it 12x. I'm at the point where I just don't do
         | these small monthly subscriptions anymore. I'd stop short of
         | saying it's predatory. More like it's insulting. The smaller
         | the payment, the more like I feel they're counting on me
         | forgetting I'm paying them, or not wanting to go through the
         | cancellation process.
        
         | corysama wrote:
         | I've never worked on indie desktop software, but I've heard the
         | same story repeated here for over a decade by those who have:
         | 
         | Everyone wants buy once, updated forever software. But, they
         | don't want to pay for it. Usually they think a fair, up-front
         | price is less than they'd pay month-to-month as a subscription
         | for a year. And, then 80+% of them will only buy when there is
         | a big sale cutting that price to a fraction. And, even when you
         | have a good product at a good price, your sales plummet every
         | time the crack for your DRM gets updated. So, you have to push
         | frivolous updates that mainly exist to keep your DRM ahead of
         | the crackers.
         | 
         | Buy once works great for consumers. And, has worked great for a
         | handful of products. But, commercial desktop software has been
         | an excessively difficult market for two decades now. That's why
         | it is a hollow shell of what it could be with the issues I
         | listed above. That's why we get so many web apps that would be
         | better for consumers as desktop apps: can't pirate a web app,
         | subscribing to a web app _feels_ justifiable.
        
           | PragmaticPulp wrote:
           | JetBrains made a good compromise, IMO: You get a perpetual
           | license that allows you to use whatever version you had at
           | the time, but you only get updates as long as you're paying
           | the subscription.
           | 
           | And that's fair, IMO. A lot of my "buy once" software in the
           | past turned into a never-ending game of unpredictable
           | upgrades. I'd have to re-buy upgrade licenses at
           | unpredictable intervals to continue using the software with
           | new version of MacOS or new plugins. At least with the
           | subscription model, it's honest and open.
        
           | xedrac wrote:
           | > Everyone wants buy once, updated forever software.
           | 
           | Actually, I prefer buy never, updated forever software.
           | Somehow free* software fills all my needs these days. I
           | wouldn't mind paying for exceptionally good software, if it
           | came with source code and the ability to build new versions
           | of it.
        
             | fhd2 wrote:
             | Didn't downvote you, but this is essentially why I have no
             | desire to build anything for programmers - unless I happen
             | to need it for myself, then I casually open source it
             | (rarely actively maintained as soon as I stop needing it).
             | 
             | I go to _fantastic_ lengths to not pay for software, to
             | mostly use software I could theoretically contribute to, or
             | even to not have to deal with learning new tools. I even
             | built my own accounting system (based on Ledger though).
             | 
             | We're an insanely tough crowd to monetise, I suppose. At
             | least some of us. Meanwhile, prosumer software in other
             | areas seems to be doing quite well, happy users, decent
             | income for the developers and all.
        
               | not_the_fda wrote:
               | I think some people are always hesitant to open their
               | pocketbook, but I've spend quite a bit on my software
               | development tools. I've bought countless IDE's, code
               | editors, diff tools, and source control clients. If it
               | makes my job easier its usually worth the price.
        
           | omoikane wrote:
           | I like DxO's model, which is "buy once and receive updates
           | for a while". Minor bug fixes appears to continue for about a
           | year, while major feature updates requires buying new
           | versions. This model means I get to choose when to upgrade
           | (and thus when to pay), and it's one reason why I use their
           | software instead of Adobe's.
        
             | pvarangot wrote:
             | Ableton is on the same model.
        
           | logicalmonster wrote:
           | > Everyone wants buy once, updated forever software.
           | 
           | People pretend they hate Paradox Interactive's DLC-based
           | business model, but I like knowing that the games I buy will
           | very likely be well-developed with many years of extra work
           | put into them. More commercial software should take a little
           | inspiration from them in terms of figuring out a way to fund
           | and work on projects long term.
           | 
           | For those that don't know, Paradox is a game publisher that
           | often release a basic shell of a grand strategy game that
           | serves as a platform for DLC. The bad news is you have to
           | shell out more money every so often for the biggest new
           | features: but the good news is that they're continuously
           | making big improvements and adding big features and have an
           | incentive to make them as good as possible.
           | 
           | I confess that I don't know exactly if this model would work
           | for a text editor, but nothing is as off-putting to me as
           | software subscriptions when something can work locally.
        
             | badsectoracula wrote:
             | On the completely opposite side of this spectrum, i avoid
             | any game that i see having DLC getting pumped out
             | constantly - Paradox being one developer i avoid.
             | 
             | I want to buy the final full game whenever the developers
             | are done with it, not buy pieces of it. If the developers
             | want to add new stuff they can always make a sequel.
             | 
             | Because of this i tend to wait until some "game of the year
             | edition" is out and the developer has started working on a
             | new game (only a very tiny fraction of developers are going
             | to bother making DLCs for their previous games instead of
             | focusing their development efforts towards the new games).
             | 
             | The only exception to that is MMOs and the like that by
             | their nature need updates and IMO the best approach there
             | _is_ having a subscription to fund the game 's development.
             | Of course the greedy powers that be figured out that giving
             | the game for free and monetizing microtransactions on the
             | easily preyed upon "whales" makes more money regardless of
             | the detriment that may have on the games' design.
        
               | logicalmonster wrote:
               | I get where you're coming from. I suspect that a lot of
               | peoples' aversion to all DLC stems from really greedy
               | phone games, where the trend has been to try and monetize
               | either extremely basic functionality or the ability to
               | play more often through gems/coins/diamonds/stars/etc.
               | Good DLC like XCOM 2's War of the Chosen basically
               | transformed and improved the experience of the entire
               | game and can be very much worth it.
               | 
               | For many kinds of games with a level of complexity beyond
               | a shoot-em-up, I feel like these kinds of games would be
               | very difficult to make without a lengthier iterative
               | process that probably requires an additional revenue
               | stream.
               | 
               | As the example given, Paradox makes grand strategy games
               | with intricate war/politics/economics and other game
               | systems that are all interrelated. Ideally, a company has
               | a lot of data and community feedback on the tiniest
               | minute details to figure out what elements work and what
               | elements don't and eventually refine the systems into the
               | best possible version.
               | 
               | That said, I'm not saying it's impossible to avoid adding
               | DLC and still fund quality long-term development. A
               | different good game Project Zomboid has been in Steam
               | early access for a decade and is in a very good state and
               | still getting big new features: but those occasional
               | indie gems are the exception, not the rule. With most of
               | Paradox's games, you basically know that it'll be
               | supported and improved for years specifically because of
               | their business model.
        
           | weakfortress wrote:
           | [dead]
        
           | klyrs wrote:
           | > Everyone wants buy once, updated forever software.
           | 
           | I want buy once, free minor bugfixes until the next major
           | version comes out software.
           | 
           | For example, I liked windows 3.1, hated windows 95, liked
           | windows 98, hated ME, liked 2000, and never liked another
           | windows. Likewise, I liked early versions of Google maps, but
           | they change the interface in small and large ways
           | unpredictably. I could go on.
           | 
           | With the subscription model, you're stuck with every whim of
           | the developers, stuck with horrible interface changes and
           | you're constantly re-learning how to use the software to do
           | the things you need to do with it. There's a tendency to make
           | new features prominent, which comes at a cost to old (that is
           | to say, core) features.
           | 
           | Auto-updates are a pox on usability. Stability in tools is
           | severely underrated and destroyed by the subscription model.
        
         | Decabytes wrote:
         | I mean there is obviously the more money component, but if the
         | software continually receives updates every month then it's
         | easier to justify it. The old photoshop model is difficult for
         | most developers to pull off (having paid versions). Also it
         | makes it challenging if you are say running a class, or doing
         | YouTube tutorials and everyone is on various versions that
         | might not have some of the new features.
         | 
         | I wonder if there is a happy medium where you can buy it, and
         | then if a couple years later the software improves a bunch you
         | can upgrade at a discounted price tiered to how many years it's
         | been since you updated. I.E if it's 1 year is a 90% discount, 2
         | years a 80% discount, 3 years 70% discount etc. What do people
         | think of this model?
        
         | Gys wrote:
         | You do not want updates that solve bugs? Some support in case
         | you have questions or problems? Maybe also some new features
         | (usually the word changes and also your experience and
         | expectations)?
        
           | ltbarcly3 wrote:
           | Somehow software vendors were able to accomplish 2 things
           | during the last 4 decades:
           | 
           | 1. Ship software, including free updates for the current
           | version to fix bugs, without any fees beyond the purchase
           | price.
           | 
           | 2. Become the richest companies in the world, by far, to the
           | point it's not even close.
           | 
           | So the idea that they need subscriptions so they can 'afford'
           | to fix bugs is ridiculous. Also, paying the subscription
           | isn't a warranty, maybe they collect my money and don't fix
           | my bugs.
        
             | zozbot234 wrote:
             | The free updates don't last indefinitely, generally you
             | still have to pay for "extended" support.
        
               | rightbyte wrote:
               | If you have happily used some software for say 6 years,
               | it is no problem if the vendor stops fixing bugs in it.
               | It already works.
               | 
               | SaaS and subscriptions is mainly a way to control the
               | users and milk them for money.
        
             | bogwog wrote:
             | They didn't become the richest companies in the world by
             | selling software without a subscription, they did it by
             | illegally suppressing competition without any repercussions
             | (among other things)
        
               | someguydave wrote:
               | Agreed, when I think of "rich software companies" they
               | all either had monopolies or were able to monopolize a
               | significant network or "mindshare".
        
           | GuB-42 wrote:
           | Yes, and don't mind paying for these.
           | 
           | But I also want the software I buy to keep working as well as
           | they did the day I bought them. I don't expect the developer
           | to fix all bugs forever without any additional payment, even
           | less add features, but I'd rather not have a kill switch,
           | which for a text editor is what subscriptions are.
           | 
           | Many software vendors (ex: Jetbrains) offer renewable
           | permanent licences that pays for maintenance without the kill
           | switch. Sublime Text, which is possibly 10x most direct
           | competitor now has a permanent license with 3 years of
           | updates, which can be considered a subscription (you have to
           | pay every 3 years for updates), but if you stop, your
           | software won't break.
        
           | nurettin wrote:
           | Bugs should be solved because the author made mistakes in
           | software that they sold, and are in the process of actively
           | selling. Not because I have a subscription.
           | 
           | Features should be added as addons that I may or may not
           | purchase.
           | 
           | Support should be optional.
        
           | heavenlyblue wrote:
           | I don't want to finance their project managers shipping new
           | "social" features and useless functionality that I am not
           | paying them for.
        
           | yeputons wrote:
           | I want these much less than I want the ability to run the
           | software without the danger of a developer disabling access
           | on a whim. Happened too many times already, including to me
           | personally. A standard example: games.
        
           | zbrozek wrote:
           | I want low-bug-density software I buy once and don't receive
           | updates for until I pay again.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | wnkrshm wrote:
             | We should pay for features not for fixes
        
             | someguydave wrote:
             | Unfortunately very few are willing to pay a high price up
             | front for quality software.
        
             | aix1 wrote:
             | Exactly this, thank you for articulating it so well.
        
           | berkle4455 wrote:
           | If I paid for a fully working product, fixes should be
           | included, similar to how vehicle oems issue recalls and
           | provide a warranty/guarantee.
        
             | have_faith wrote:
             | Am I right that the Sketch app used to work like this? just
             | looked at their website and only see a subscription
             | offered.
        
               | junon wrote:
               | It's because nobody complained when software moved toward
               | subscription models.
        
         | mrozbarry wrote:
         | I think it would be great to have two streams. Purchase a
         | specific X.Y.* version, revision updates for free, and purchase
         | other updates, OR subscribe at a much lower cost monthly to get
         | all updates for any version. Just like JetBrains, if you stop
         | the subscription, you keep what you have.
        
         | charcircuit wrote:
         | It provides an incentive to keep shipping value to your
         | existing users as opposed to trying to solely grow the size of
         | the userbase since only new users give you money.
        
       | fckgnad wrote:
       | [dead]
        
       | make3 wrote:
       | vscode, the main competition to this I assume, is very fast to
       | me. would be curious to know how they compare
        
         | weakfortress wrote:
         | Try to open a large text file in VS Code and watch it grind to
         | a halt. While VS Code offers a buffet of features that are cool
         | and convenient it has a lot of problems.
        
           | __float wrote:
           | I find I occasionally look at "huge" text files in my day
           | job, but they're almost never _source_ files -- so I don 't
           | need syntax highlighting, jump to definition, etc.
           | 
           | Is this something you do often in your C++ development?
        
             | weakfortress wrote:
             | I work with data, so it's not uncommon to load a large file
             | either deliberately or accidentally. Highlighting isn't the
             | issue. Even a CSV on the order of 100-200MB kills VS code
             | dead. I assume this is because it's an electron app. Other
             | apps do not have this problem.
        
         | AlchemistCamp wrote:
         | That's very surprising. I've found VS Code to be considerably
         | slower than Sublime Text or VIM for just about everything. I
         | don't think there would be much overlap at all between VS Code
         | users and people who would want something like this.
        
       | franky47 wrote:
       | If you use it, does that make you a 10x engineer?
       | 
       | (I'll see myself out)
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | Koshkin wrote:
       | emacs is no longer constantly swapping, either.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | xigoi wrote:
       | What does it offer over Neovim with some plugins and a C++
       | language server?
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | ahepp wrote:
       | Does HN really allow posting just a purchase link? Not even a
       | discussion of why anyone would use this over vim/VS code + LSP? I
       | have to scroll below the fold to even see what it claims the
       | features are. Sorry to be that guy, but this one should have been
       | caught in the spam filter.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | kvathupo wrote:
       | Given all the idioms in C++, I don't think constraining the
       | editor to one language is a bad idea *if* it caters to these
       | unique constructs. E.g. I had a templated PImpl class [1] whose
       | template parameter _was_ the implementation. It was a pain to
       | `grep` for the classes specializing it, especially when other
       | classes extended this PImpl class (sometimes extending a
       | specialization, sometimes not).
       | 
       | [1] - https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/pimpl
        
       | Kukumber wrote:
       | The editor that puts to shame visual studio, if you can afford
       | to, consider supporting
       | 
       | Fast software deserve all of our support
        
       | djmips wrote:
       | Great name for your product!
        
       | tempodox wrote:
       | The page doesn't say, but this is Windows only.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | stephc_int13 wrote:
       | Subscription model is not a good idea for this type of tool.
       | 
       | The Sublime Text licence is not cheap but is in a better spot,
       | IMHO.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | user2342 wrote:
         | As I understood it, the subscription for the beta is optional
         | and intended to support development until the first release. I
         | would expect a more traditional license model with the release
         | version.
        
       | SketchySeaBeast wrote:
       | Admirable goals, but doesn't keeping it limited to C++ keep the
       | potential for backers limited? Whole-assing one thing is better
       | than half-assing two I guess, but it's an interesting initial
       | language. Is C++ tooling in particular that bad?
        
         | AlchemistCamp wrote:
         | C++ is one of the most popular languages in the world. It's a
         | gigantic market and growing every year. The bigger problem is
         | getting anyone to notice a new editor at all.
        
         | netr0ute wrote:
         | > Is C++ tooling in particular that bad?
         | 
         | It's not that bad, but doing simple stuff like adding a library
         | can be a huge pain because you have to know how compilers link
         | programs internally to know how to fix the errors you're going
         | to get.
        
         | fathyb wrote:
         | > Admirable goals, but doesn't keeping it limited to C++ keep
         | the potential for backers limited?
         | 
         | Agreed, feels like the C++ support could be packaged into an
         | LSP server to support other languages, and let other IDEs
         | benefit from its completion, increasing the number of potential
         | backers.
         | 
         | > Is C++ tooling in particular that bad?
         | 
         | Yes, at least when it comes to IDE support. Visual Studio on
         | Windows gave me the best experience, but it's Windows so I
         | don't use it. Xcode is so slow and unstable, it's a shame, it
         | used to be great. CLion doesn't scale well with huge projects.
        
           | SketchySeaBeast wrote:
           | Ah, OK. I assumed it was just a matter of adding the right
           | extension to VSCode or Sublime and you were off to the races.
           | If this fills a gap that's great.
        
             | kentonv wrote:
             | VSCode integrates with clangd for good jump-to-definition
             | and auto-completion. The problem is VSCode, which is built
             | on JavaScript/HTML, has become quite slow of late. The
             | editor feels sluggish to respond to keypresses, especially
             | in large files with lots of includes. It's always just on
             | the edge of bearable.
        
               | fathyb wrote:
               | In my case VSCode is very responsive, but the clang-based
               | language server is pegging an entire CPU core parsing
               | millions of C++ files in the project, causing it to not
               | respond to editor requests.
        
               | SketchySeaBeast wrote:
               | > but the clang-based language server is pegging an
               | entire CPU core parsing millions of C++ files
               | 
               | It would be very interesting to see if the 10x Editor
               | does better in this case.
        
             | bogwog wrote:
             | It's all about the build system. Sublime has built-in
             | support for a few, with more available as extensions. Auto-
             | complete works out of the box using Sublime's own language-
             | agnostic implementation, which obviously isn't perfect, but
             | you can also install an LSP.
        
       | erlich wrote:
       | I half-expected it to be written in Rust.
        
         | pohl wrote:
         | If you're interested in something like that, Lapce is looking
         | pretty good, despite being in early stages of development.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | nickelpro wrote:
       | What features here are differentiated from any other editor?
       | 
       | VSC isn't slow for me. Is "speed" the only thing on offer?
       | Because giving up the plugin environment is a big ask for that.
        
         | darknavi wrote:
         | > VSC isn't slow for me.
         | 
         | How big is your project? With Visual Assist X and our solution
         | it can take me upwards of 30 seconds before I can do anything
         | after opening the project.
        
           | bigbillheck wrote:
           | How often are you opening projects?
        
       | 29athrowaway wrote:
       | How does it compare to cscope?
        
       | liquidify wrote:
       | Can we get a "namespace" tree that shows namespaces as folders
       | (similar to how Intellij works with packages)?
        
         | stewartlynch8 wrote:
         | Do you mean a navigation bar at the top that shows the scopes?
         | If so that is planned after the 1.0 release.
        
       | fprog wrote:
       | I wonder what the author thinks of Sublime Text. Fast everything
       | (search, opening files, switching projects...) is a big part of
       | Sublime's value proposition, one that has so far survived the era
       | of VSCode. And AFAIK it is written in C++, and can certainly be
       | used to write C++.
        
         | stewartlynch8 wrote:
         | I've only tried sublime text briefly to be honest. I like its
         | speed, but I need something that can open huge Visual Studio
         | projects. I also wasn't sure about the C++ parsing which
         | requires installing packages.
         | 
         | Just to be clear, 10x supports syntax highlighting for many
         | languages, it's only the parser that is C++ specific.
        
         | Thaxll wrote:
         | Re-inventing the wheel is very common for IDE / editors, ofc
         | this is already done by Sublime but I think in this crowded
         | space it's all about perception, maybe Sublime missed the train
         | and now you need a new "fresh" IDE to capture the audience.
        
           | gmiller123456 wrote:
           | I don't think they "missed the train", just VSCode is free,
           | and there's not enough compelling reason to pay for Sublime
           | now.
           | 
           | I was a Sublime user for quite a while, and switched to
           | VSCode purely because it handled multiple cursors better.
           | Ironically, multi-cursor support was my key reason for
           | switching to Sublime from Notepad++. VSCode is slower, but
           | not enough to actually impact my performance coding.
        
         | bogwog wrote:
         | I would definitely choose Sublime over this, only because
         | Sublime isn't limited to/focused on a single language. However,
         | if I were a paying CLion user, this editor might be a more
         | compelling buy if it addresses some pain points, like
         | performance.
         | 
         | but then again, Jetbrains is working on their own "polyglot"
         | editor called Fleet, which is aiming to be much faster and more
         | lightweight than their existing dinosaur IDEs.
        
       | enqk wrote:
       | Been using it daily at work on a relatively large C++ codebase
       | for a 20 year old native application, and it's really nice to
       | have an IDE that starts instantly, indexes and searches quickly
       | and integrates well with Visual Studio's sln. The performance is
       | just beyond what normal IDEs end up with
        
       | BaculumMeumEst wrote:
       | I would need to see a side-by-side comparison of 10x and vs code
       | performing equivalent tasks in a large codebase before investing
       | time and money in this tool.
        
       | weakfortress wrote:
       | [dead]
        
       | CodeVisio wrote:
       | >10x is written from the ground up in C++, with a custom UI
       | system and GPU rendering.
       | 
       | It would be interesting to know which custom UI.
        
         | thewebcount wrote:
         | Yeah, whenever I see something like that, my first thought is,
         | "Doesn't work like other apps on your OS, so will be a pain to
         | get used to, will have weird inconsistencies, and won't
         | integrate properly with OS features that come standard with all
         | other apps you run.
        
           | CodeVisio wrote:
           | I know. In theory, custom UI doesn't necessarily mean to have
           | such freedom to "change" what UI's rules of the OS has been
           | established. It should sound more like, I don't use your way
           | of rendering stuff.
        
         | stewartlynch8 wrote:
         | I mean custom as in "I wrote it myself". It's not based on a
         | slow and bloated UI framework. Hopefully it's fairly standard
         | from a Windows point of view though.
         | 
         | If you want to know more, I have lots of dev videos on my
         | youtube channel. https://www.youtube.com/@puredevsoftware
        
         | twobitshifter wrote:
         | To me that's a turnoff, you might get an IDE where the speed is
         | faster, but updates and fixes will be slow to come because the
         | team could not get over NIH.
        
       | gauddasa wrote:
       | At least mention "Windows only" somewhere on home page or even
       | better just below the Download buttons. It was shocking to see
       | exe file being downloaded without any prompt or warning about
       | operating system. Had to dig into FAQ to see that Linux and MacOS
       | support are planned.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | theLiminator wrote:
       | Looks pretty great, I won't personally use it, but best of luck
       | to the author.
       | 
       | I've been very impressed by lapce's pace of development. Imo,
       | open source text editors are going to fully supplant closed-
       | source.
       | 
       | Perhaps 10x is a killer app if you only use C++, but for a modern
       | day polyglot experience, I'm betting on lapce.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-01-03 23:00 UTC)