4 ms·
What's missing here is the programming language. There are incredibly flexible, concise, low-ceremony languages, with implicit types where placing an IDE betwe
by hakunin 3y ago
What's missing here is the programming language.
There are incredibly flexible, concise, low-ceremony languages, with implicit types where placing an IDE between you and code kinda obfuscates them. These are the languages where I think the best representation of code is the code itself.
Then there are elaborate, verbose, high-ceremony languages with explicit types, where looking at code and keeping up with ceremony might be a bit overwhelming. For those languages you probably want a lot more automation and a variety of info representation that goes way beyond code.
I'd go out on a limb to say that everyone here who likes/dislikes IDEs will split almost perfectly among those two language categories.
- lostmsu 3y agoNah. "less ceremony" languages are a huge pain to use, but even there IDEs make them much more tolerable.
- hakunin 3y agoYou're the reason I wrote "split _almost_ perfectly". That said, looks like your history involves .NET -> Python/.NET. I went .NET -> PHP -> Ruby/Elixir/Go. It took me some time to withdraw from .NET before I started preferring not to have an IDE. If you're still split half/half between two worlds, I can understand why you're still hooked.