3 ms·

If you can't refactor with just search and replace, you don't really know the depths of your project, and yes - I would be uncomfortable working with you.

orbifold 9y ago
That just means you've never worked on a big project, where the component you are responsible for is used by >10 different other components. One very quickly reaches a limit where manual refactoring is an option.
- fit2rule 9y ago
  Oh, I've worked on plenty of big projects - in fact, your life is probably being protected by my software right now. Its just that I don't believe in succumbing to the crutch of tools. If the IDE is getting in the way, get the IDE out of the way - too many projects are incapable of doing this.
  - coldtea 9y ago
    >Oh, I've worked on plenty of big projects - in fact, your life is probably being protected by my software right now. Those two are orthogonal concepts. There is e.g. car or medical embedded software that's tiny in scope compared to a big enterprise project.
    - fit2rule 9y ago
      Yeah, try taking a train in any one of 38 different countries around the world .. that big enough for you? No, you really don't need the IDE to make big software.
      - coldtea 9y ago
        You don't need computers to ride trains either. Programming, as most technologies, is not about what you basically need. We are not cavemen. It's about what enhances what you can do.
    - kaftoy 9y ago
      Just a remark on the topic. Been working in vehicle software business for 12+ years now and renaming variables is almost never done. In fact I don't remember someone ever renaming a system (global) variable. There tens of thousands such variables in a system, plus about the same number of calibratable constants. We have renamed our drivers variables only when we switched to a newer architecture (multicore ready, AUTOSAR compliant). The entire code base running a modern car goes well within millions of code lines. Our IDE changed in time from Blue River X32 v5 to internally modified Eclipse plugin. The only major use for us are X32 type contractions. [1] [1]http://tinypic.com/r/20qhq4y/9 http://tinypic.com/r/20qhq4y/9
AnthonBerg 9y ago
Textual search and replace is blind to the syntax and semantics of the programming language, of the software itself. Why should we use stone tools?
- fit2rule 9y ago
  You, yourself, should not let your control over the project be 'usurped by complexity'. If you can't handle the complexity such that you need an IDE to do refactoring, you should definitely not promote this fact far and wide - its far better to promote the style of thinking where IDE is not a requirement, but rather a luxury.
  - AnthonBerg 9y ago
    I'm sorry, but I fail to see the anything but superstition in the refusal to do search and replace through a language parser.
    - fit2rule 9y ago
      It means there are parts of the project you really don't have an embracive grip over, and that does not make you a great developer. It makes you a weaker one.
      - AnthonBerg 9y ago
        No, it means that I consider there to be a difference between language constructs, variable names, strings, comments, etc. - in other words what a parser does. String/based find-replace muddles these together. An IDE is but a collection of similar tools. I’m not strong if I choose to walk and weak if I choose to use motorised transport.
        fit2rule 9y ago
        You're weak if, after using motorized transport to get around most of your life, you're suddenly asked to walk - and can't do it. Look, there's no point arguing about this any further - but I urge you to look at this alternative point of view in your professional career. Without fail, those whose proficiency depends on the features of an IDE are, in my experience, more glib about their work and problem solving, and less likely to actually push to solve common programming problems on their own. Maybe you'll start to notice this too.
coldtea 9y ago
If you actually really know the "depths of your project" then you haven't worked in any really big project, and yes, I would be uncomfortable working with you.
megaman22 9y ago
If you think that search and replace is an appropriate way to refactor, when there are better options, then I'm not sure I'd be comfortable working with you...

orbifold 9y ago

That just means you've never worked on a big project, where the component you are responsible for is used by >10 different other components. One very quickly reaches a limit where manual refactoring is an option.

fit2rule 9y ago
Oh, I've worked on plenty of big projects - in fact, your life is probably being protected by my software right now. Its just that I don't believe in succumbing to the crutch of tools. If the IDE is getting in the way, get the IDE out of the way - too many projects are incapable of doing this.
- coldtea 9y ago
  >Oh, I've worked on plenty of big projects - in fact, your life is probably being protected by my software right now. Those two are orthogonal concepts. There is e.g. car or medical embedded software that's tiny in scope compared to a big enterprise project.
  - fit2rule 9y ago
    Yeah, try taking a train in any one of 38 different countries around the world .. that big enough for you? No, you really don't need the IDE to make big software.
    - coldtea 9y ago
      You don't need computers to ride trains either. Programming, as most technologies, is not about what you basically need. We are not cavemen. It's about what enhances what you can do.
  - kaftoy 9y ago
    Just a remark on the topic. Been working in vehicle software business for 12+ years now and renaming variables is almost never done. In fact I don't remember someone ever renaming a system (global) variable. There tens of thousands such variables in a system, plus about the same number of calibratable constants. We have renamed our drivers variables only when we switched to a newer architecture (multicore ready, AUTOSAR compliant). The entire code base running a modern car goes well within millions of code lines. Our IDE changed in time from Blue River X32 v5 to internally modified Eclipse plugin. The only major use for us are X32 type contractions. [1] [1]http://tinypic.com/r/20qhq4y/9 http://tinypic.com/r/20qhq4y/9

AnthonBerg 9y ago

Textual search and replace is blind to the syntax and semantics of the programming language, of the software itself. Why should we use stone tools?

fit2rule 9y ago
You, yourself, should not let your control over the project be 'usurped by complexity'. If you can't handle the complexity such that you need an IDE to do refactoring, you should definitely not promote this fact far and wide - its far better to promote the style of thinking where IDE is not a requirement, but rather a luxury.
- AnthonBerg 9y ago
  I'm sorry, but I fail to see the anything but superstition in the refusal to do search and replace through a language parser.
  - fit2rule 9y ago
    It means there are parts of the project you really don't have an embracive grip over, and that does not make you a great developer. It makes you a weaker one.
    - AnthonBerg 9y ago
      No, it means that I consider there to be a difference between language constructs, variable names, strings, comments, etc. - in other words what a parser does. String/based find-replace muddles these together. An IDE is but a collection of similar tools. I’m not strong if I choose to walk and weak if I choose to use motorised transport.
      - fit2rule 9y ago
        You're weak if, after using motorized transport to get around most of your life, you're suddenly asked to walk - and can't do it. Look, there's no point arguing about this any further - but I urge you to look at this alternative point of view in your professional career. Without fail, those whose proficiency depends on the features of an IDE are, in my experience, more glib about their work and problem solving, and less likely to actually push to solve common programming problems on their own. Maybe you'll start to notice this too.

coldtea 9y ago

If you actually really know the "depths of your project" then you haven't worked in any really big project, and yes, I would be uncomfortable working with you.

megaman22 9y ago

If you think that search and replace is an appropriate way to refactor, when there are better options, then I'm not sure I'd be comfortable working with you...