Although I sometimes claim to try out the various IDEs every few years, what I really mean is that I try out Eclipse every few years. I've only tried Intellij once, recently, and to be honest I think I killed it after a couple of minutes waiting for it to start. I'm pretty sure I never got round to actually doing anything with it.
As for Netbeans, I'm not sure I've even seen it since 1999. Not on my desktop or anyone else's. When I complain of bloated, slow, unresponsive IDEs, I always think of Netbeans. But when I've complained of crashy, bloated, slow, and unresponsive IDEs, well, I'm more likely to have been thinking of Eclipse.
Today I thought I'd fix a few of Sun's simpler Swing bugs in JColorChooser. The kind that have been "fix understood" since 2003 but which shouldn't take more than a few minutes to fix. The aggravating "have the bastards ever tried to actually use this shit?" stuff.
Going to the OpenJDK website, I saw they were advertising Netbeans (currently version 6.5.1) as an easy way to get into OpenJDK development. Fair enough, I thought, I'll give that a go.
The instructions should have warned me off. Don't expect any special OpenJDK-building integration. Netbeans doesn't let you deal with Mercurial forests without manually installing the forest extension; the instructions go straight to downloading a .zip source bundle. Okay. They then go on to explain where to find Netbeans project files to open, but they seem to have moved since the instructions were written. find(1) found them, and I opened the small "swing" project...
My first problem was where Netbeans hung my X11 server. I was selecting text at the time, in the first file I double-clicked on, just to see what the editor was like. Thankfully I was using Linux, so I could switch to a different virtual terminal, log in and kill Netbeans, and then switch back to the virtual terminal with X11.
After restarting Netbeans, I tried to build the "swing" project, but it won't build out of the box (this was OpenJDK 1.7.0-b59). Something to do with Nimbus. (Of course!) So naively I thought I'd open the "world" project and build that. Only Netbeans couldn't really open that project on my puny machine. 4 cores and 4 GiB of RAM just isn't enough, seemingly. I sat waiting for it to finish (because the UI was really unresponsive during its "scanning" process) but it took long enough (using only one core) that the screensaver came on. And, presumably for reasons related to my first problem, I couldn't unlock the screensaver until I switched virtual terminal to kill Netbeans.
Don't get me wrong, I saw hints of interesting features in Netbeans. Its behavior when you return to a file you've edited externally but not in Netbeans, for example, feels better than Evergreen's behavior; Evergreen alerts you to the modification by drawing a watermark behind the content, and requires you to manually "Revert to Saved", showing you a diff when you do so. This is sometimes useful — if you've got a generated file open, for example, it's really nice to be able to keep one golden version while you experiment with the code that generates the file, seeing a diff after each run from the convenience of your editor. But automatically and silently reverting to saved seems a lot more convenient for the more common case where you've simply pull new changes from version control, or you used Vim over SSH on your bus ride home or whatever.
Netbeans was also pretty good-looking for a Swing application, although somewhat uneven; the directory chooser looked like some SwingSet Metal horror that probably hadn't changed since 1999.
And Netbeans' uninstall.sh script (in the directory you installed Netbeans in) seems to work perfectly, too, which was a relief. But overall this was a bad enough experience that I fear it will be 2019 before I give Netbeans another try.
The silly part is that building OpenJDK is pretty quick and easy. (At least compared to fighting Netbeans.) Download and install a source .zip, download and install the remaining binary plug (some SNMP crap), install the things you don't have that the README-builds.html lists, and "make". I also had to install libxtst-dev, which I didn't see mentioned, and I found that the Makefiles don't appear to be "make -j"-safe.
So there's not much difficult about building OpenJDK any more. How about slow?
Even on my too-puny-for-Netbeans 2007-vintage Core 2 Quad with 4 GiB of RAM, a clean build only took about 45 minutes. (With the build seemingly never using more than two cores.)
Despite it being something any monkey could do, if they were of a mind to, it's strangely gratifying to run your own JVM at the end:
$ ./build/linux-amd64/bin/java -version openjdk version "1.7.0-internal" OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 1.7.0-internal-elliotth_2009_05_24_21_45-b00) OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 16.0-b03, mixed mode)
If you're wondering why I used a source .zip rather than using Mercurial to check out the forests, it's not that I haven't tried Mercurial a few times. It's just "too hard".
I'll try Mercurial again when I'm running an OS that has a sufficiently up-to-date package. Hopefully one day Sun's choice of Mercurial will look like a wise long-term decision, but it's a bummer that it makes life hard for casuals like me right now. Hopefully, just as building OpenJDK was once "too hard", but is now – once you have the source – perfectly reasonable, we'll be able to say the same about Mercurial.