5 ms·

>This isn't Starcraft, very few developers are limited by their APM throughput through the UI. Made me smile. This is a great analogy. Tactics vs strategy. You

>This isn't Starcraft, very few developers are limited by their APM throughput through the UI. Made me smile. This is a great analogy. Tactics vs strategy. You can become more efficient at low-level tasks by doing faster text editing. However, as you get into actual software engineering, the first time you need to do some semantic refactoring will wipe out any time you saved through low-level efficiency.

TeMPOraL 8y ago
> However, as you get into actual software engineering, the first time you need to do some semantic refactoring will wipe out any time you saved through low-level efficiency. That applies to Java and C# only, where the language grammar is so simplified that you can be 99% confident semantic refactoring didn't screw your code up. > You can become more efficient at low-level tasks by doing faster text editing. It's not efficiency for efficiency's sake. It's for being able to code at the speed of thought, to tighten your feedback loop to the point where the act of writing & editing happens in your mind in larger syntactical units. Also, for actual software engineering, nothing beats a pen and a piece of paper.
- kbutler 8y ago
  > Also, for actual software engineering, nothing beats a pen and a piece of paper. Sometimes I use pen and paper quite effectively, but between the slowness of writing and the difficulty of editing, I wouldn't describe it as ideal.
  - TeMPOraL 8y ago
    Personally, I use pen and paper (and a whiteboard) almost exclusively to draw and jot down very short notes. I do plenty of longer outlining when designing too (much more than drawing), and that happens in my text editor (Emacs, Org Mode).
- eitland 8y ago
  > That applies to Java and C# only, where the language grammar is so simplified that you can be 99% confident semantic refactoring didn't screw your code Some of us would say well-designed instead of simplified :-)
  - TeMPOraL 8y ago
    > Some of us would say well-designed instead of simplified :-) That's a longer topic. Having worked professionally both with Java (Eclipse, Netbeans, IntelliJ IDEA) and Common Lisp (Emacs + SLIME), I've experienced both sides of the coin. On the one hand, working with a language without a proper REPL and macros is painful to me. On the other hand, I frequently wish it was even possible to have semantic completion and automatic refactoring in Common Lisp, even at 10% of what you get for Java out of the box in an IDE...
    - gambler 8y ago
      C# has both semantic refactoring and REPL. It might look like Java, but it's a much better designed language. They are even fixing all the horrible crap that was dragging it down with .NET Core.

TeMPOraL 8y ago

> However, as you get into actual software engineering, the first time you need to do some semantic refactoring will wipe out any time you saved through low-level efficiency. That applies to Java and C# only, where the language grammar is so simplified that you can be 99% confident semantic refactoring didn't screw your code up. > You can become more efficient at low-level tasks by doing faster text editing. It's not efficiency for efficiency's sake. It's for being able to code at the speed of thought, to tighten your feedback loop to the point where the act of writing & editing happens in your mind in larger syntactical units. Also, for actual software engineering, nothing beats a pen and a piece of paper.

kbutler 8y ago
> Also, for actual software engineering, nothing beats a pen and a piece of paper. Sometimes I use pen and paper quite effectively, but between the slowness of writing and the difficulty of editing, I wouldn't describe it as ideal.
- TeMPOraL 8y ago
  Personally, I use pen and paper (and a whiteboard) almost exclusively to draw and jot down very short notes. I do plenty of longer outlining when designing too (much more than drawing), and that happens in my text editor (Emacs, Org Mode).
eitland 8y ago
> That applies to Java and C# only, where the language grammar is so simplified that you can be 99% confident semantic refactoring didn't screw your code Some of us would say well-designed instead of simplified :-)
- TeMPOraL 8y ago
  > Some of us would say well-designed instead of simplified :-) That's a longer topic. Having worked professionally both with Java (Eclipse, Netbeans, IntelliJ IDEA) and Common Lisp (Emacs + SLIME), I've experienced both sides of the coin. On the one hand, working with a language without a proper REPL and macros is painful to me. On the other hand, I frequently wish it was even possible to have semantic completion and automatic refactoring in Common Lisp, even at 10% of what you get for Java out of the box in an IDE...
  - gambler 8y ago
    C# has both semantic refactoring and REPL. It might look like Java, but it's a much better designed language. They are even fixing all the horrible crap that was dragging it down with .NET Core.