3 ms·
It was possible do it with literate programming for ages. Combine it with emacs, mmm-mode and, say, auctex - and you'll get your IDE.
by sklogic 11y ago
It was possible do it with literate programming for ages. Combine it with emacs, mmm-mode and, say, auctex - and you'll get your IDE.
- rapind 11y agoI used litcoffee* for a while, and it really makes you think about and code for a future reader / maintainer, which is pretty great. It really slows you down though (good thing?) when trying to dump your ideas into code, especially if you end up writing exploratory code that you later delete (I do this a lot). I think literate code could be really great however for refactors. Once you've figured out the correct implementation and have the time & hopefully budget to revisit your fast code. Maybe it won't feel like the chore of straight up documentation, and more like the enjoyment of polishing your art. * http://coffeescript.org/#literate http://coffeescript.org/#literate
- sklogic 11y agoInteresting. My experience is different - I write my throwaway code starting with a free form prose, dumping all my vague ideas into a text, which is then filled with a very volatile code to explore the listed ideas. It results in a mess, of course, but a mess with a track of what I tried to achieve. I'd always rewrite what is left of such an effort from scratch, but it is easy to do so with all the literate brain-dump surrounding my code.
- rapind 11y agoDefinitely a different approach. I think I will try that. I would imagine you end up refactoring the documentation as much as the code. I pair quite a bit these days, and this may compliment our process nicely.