3 ms·
> " I want the "firmware" that knows how to assemble building blocks of code to be in my brain, not in my computer. To me, writing code is like driving a stick
by points 16y ago
> " I want the "firmware" that knows how to assemble building blocks of code to be in my brain, not in my computer. To me, writing code is like driving a stick shift, for much of it I don't even think, it's unconscious competence. Can you imagine driving a car with auto-complete, color coding, or drop down menus? To this day, I get pissed off when something doesn't compile the first time, usually because of a typo."
Well said. I've also had the argument a few times, but have given up trying now.
You could also compare it to a novelist using a "Writing IDE" to create a story. Click "John", Click "Conversation with Kate", Fill in the speechmarks, click "Build suspense macro". It would be mental to write a novel that way, so why do some people write programs that way and then look surprised when they end up with rubbish code.
- jonhendry 16y agoThe novel-writing analogy is a bit off, because the novel elements you mention are higher level than a single API call would be. They're more like a subroutine or algorithm level. IDEs don't really do that. An IDE's functionality is more like a screenwriting app's formatting of a script as the writer writes.
- points 16y agoidk, I've seen a lot of IDE's that have scary high level things like "Refactor this", "Remove unused code" etc.
- loewenskind 16y agoNo, a closer analogy would be when you're near the end of your novel you realize that you could add a twist by having Kate actually die in the first act and no one realizes it until the twist ending. Refactoring tools make sure that you don't have to comb through every line of the previous 1200 pages looking for inconsistencies.