Hacker News Reader

Comment by makmanalp | Hacker News Reader

Does anyone have opinions on how well Intellisense for python in VS code works in comparison to Jedi or PyCharm / Jetbrains' completion?

View on HN

Worse than PyCharm. I miss PyCharm's completion. Not enough to put up with the rest of the PyCharm interface, but I miss it.

Can confirm, VS Code's completion is okay-ish. You will get appropriate docstrings and autocompletion when it works, but it definitely has a long way to go.

Thanks for the feedback - it's an area we'll definitely be looking at closely.

Would you (and others) be willing to have an extra 20 MB download to get better intellisense? We could potentially work with the PTVS team on better/faster intellisense, but it would require writing that code in .NET which would mean downloading a private copy of .NET for use by the extension.

Personally, I definitely would. Disk space is not really a particularly limited commodity for me, and considering that VSCode's install footprint is already 200MB+, it's not really a problem.

Of course, it's always possible to add some kind of setting for better intellisense, but I suspect most people don't really care too much about the disk size. What I would care about is performance impact/CPU usage.

Another potential issue for me is if adding PVTS would force the extension to be closed source like the C++ extension.

TL;DR: Definitely

PTVS itself is open source so there's no worry there (our whole team does it's work as open source wherever it makes sense, and in this instance it would).

Didn't realize that. In that case, sounds awesome!

Without hesitation, seems like a very worthwhile tradeoff (for any language IMO)

Yes, without hesitation.

>Would you (and others) be willing to have an extra 20 MB download to get better intellisense?

Absolutely.

It uses Jedi under the hood, works ok for me. Sometimes it can't figure out the type, but that's when type annotations come handy.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com