For example I use intellij on Windows but want to compile and test on the Linux machine. If it takes 30 seconds longer than wsl 1, why would I bother changing?
What is the actual point of wsl if not for the cross compatible filesystems
There is a Reddit sub for WSL (/r/bashonubuntuonwindows) and it's apparent that MS has PR people on it pimping each new release. Reminding these mostly new developers that Cygwin has been around (with all its problems) for years, brings on a flood of downvotes.
And now it's exactly the same with WSL2; when someone has an issue with some esoteric networking feature that is still not supported on WSL2 beta versions, I'll often remind them that VMWare Player and VirtualBox have been around for a decade and will solve their problem, while also including all sorts of nice features like shared folders, drag & drop, copy and paste integration, etc. But they don't want to hear it. They've been fed so much marketing that WSL and WSL2 are really something incredible...
Maybe wait for an IDE update that handles properly WSL 2?
Then there is no WSL 2 handling in your editor. VSCode remote extension works in the same way for either WSL 2, or a full-fledged Linux VM, or even a remote Linux server.
As someone who run a Linux VM side by side all times, I really don't get WSL 2.
It's the same as saying: " As a person who runs containers all the time, I really don't get Docker".
The point is VS Code handles my code hosted in WSL 2 out of the box. I don't care that I could use a VM or a remote server instead.
I just suggested that the parent commenter waits for is IDE to implement a similar integration...
VSCode made some unique design choices which enable them to support connecting to any Linux server, VM or not. In contrast, these design choices may not be possible for other IDEs. So, because WSL 2 is, effectively, a Linux VM, supporting it in editor is harder than supporting WSL 1.
As for "I really don't get" part, I wanted to say that WSL 2 sounds like a regression to me, WSL 1 makes it possible to achieve something (namely, local-ish cross-"os" net/process/file-system integration) that is entirely impossible otherwise, while WSL 2 is a nice packaged-up solution but functionally does not do more than people already get (Hyper-V).
The software engineer in me agrees with you, WSL 1 was architecturally more ambitious than version 2.
As a user, I couldn't care less. I just hope Microsoft manages to create a good ecosystem around WSL.
Then you could as well run your stuff in a regular docker container, WSL becomes redundant.
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/wsl/wsl2-faq#what-w...
Also, it seems the Intellij team is working on supporting WSL2 in some ways. Check their issue tracker.
As long as your processes and files are from the wsl vm, it is extremely fast. I rather use the wsl shell, so all of my files are in the vm.
Personally I don't like VS Code, I too use IntelliJ IDEA, which will probably end up having support, but it didn't last time I tried.
On my Macbook I also use Emacs and GUI versus terminal shouldn't be an issue. I'd want Emacs from inside a WSL bash, I'd want it from the Windows GUI too. So that's going to be a headache.
[1] https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/IDEA-197573?p=IDEABKL-7...
It's not the appdata folder right?
https://www.theverge.com/2020/4/8/21213783/microsoft-windows...
https://devblogs.microsoft.com/commandline/whats-new-for-wsl...
(Also, hints are that Microsoft is exploring adding shortcuts to \\wsl$ directly to the File Explorer left hand tree.)