4 ms·

I can't help but feel that every person I've seen who loves their IDE codes Java. I, for years, did not understand this finding vim and emacs perfectly sufficie

by tel 15y ago

I can't help but feel that every person I've seen who loves their IDE codes Java. I, for years, did not understand this finding vim and emacs perfectly sufficient. I liked SLIME, but found it only marginally better than any non-"superpowered" editor/repl pairing. Then I tried programming Java. I concede totally. It's not just easier to program Java with an IDE, Java is essentially designed to be impossible to code without an IDE. The language is simply too large and spread out to be held in your head without the help of tools. I think the complexity you talk about---large functions in particular---are also endemic of "Java style". Clojure is a great example of code designed without an IDE in mind where functions need to be small and orthogonal just to make it possible to survive without an IDE. I think Light Table embraces that idea and seeks to solve organizational issues involved with "Clojure style" coding.

brazzy 15y ago
On could also see it exactly the other way round: Java's strong typing makes it possible for an IDE to do amazing things, which help you cope with horrible codebases, which in turn makes code viable that would be completely unmanageable in other languages. As for "Java is essentially designed to be impossible to code without an IDE.", I'd say that's a pretty ridiculous statement given the state of art of IDEs at the time Java was designed and became widely used. They did little more than integrate editor, compiler and debugger.
- tel 15y ago
  Perhaps it just has to do with modern practices and libraries encouraged by modern IDEs. I approached it recently, so I can't speak for times before the IDEs were there. Strong typing is certainly very helpful for making smart compilers and tools---I can't deny that, I'm a Haskell junky. I don't think it's always a best practice though. Being able to handle horrible codebases means that the language/editor environment also allows horrible codebases to survive longer.
  - brazzy 15y ago
    That always seemed a really, really unproductive notion to me, that great tools must be bad because they help you deal with problems that would otherwise make you fail sooner.
    - tel 15y ago
      I didn't say IDEs weren't powerful or bad. I indicated the opposite. Sports cars are fantastic. They are really fun to drive. I would start walking if everyone in America had one. Too dangerous.
    - tel 15y ago
      I didn't say IDEs weren't powerful or good in and of themselves. I indicated the opposite. Sports cars are fantastic. They are really fun to drive. I would start walking if everyone in America had one. Too dangerous.
- kamaal 15y ago
  No Sorry, And please. Almost all Java programmers I've seen so far can barely write any code without IDE, autocompletion and intellisense. Even people who claim to have years of experience in Java. Its just the community is very heavily on IDE side. The libraries, frameworks are all heavy bloats designed with the perspective that IDE is going to take care of that anyway. In other words, Java world without IDE doesn't exist and I presume that is going to be the case for a long time to come. And that is one of the reasons why I never went deep into Java because one tour of eclipse and the best and worst Java programmers both become the same.
  - brazzy 15y ago
    Yeah, do keep repeating your bias and prejudices while ignoring conflicting facts pointed out by others, and tell yourself that makes you smart.
    - kamaal 15y ago
      Its neither a bias nor a prejudice. Because I write in Java and Other languages like Python and Perl in my day job. Although I'm trying to run away from Java as quickly as I can. Vast majority of Java programmers can't program without IDE's is a fact. Java being verbose is a fact. Java frameworks being bloated is a fact. Medium to large Java application not being easily handled thorough ordinary tools like text editors is a fact. Its almost like what Dijkstra said couple of decades back about basic. It can destroy your thinking abilities. I don't want to risk mine with too much exposure to autocompletion and intellisense. And without them it makes zero sense to write in Java, as you can no longer be even remotely productive. Well I don't know about others, but I, myself would not like to be bunched in that kind of commodity market of programmers whose only known expertise is 'Knows how to use an IDE'.
      - brazzy 15y ago
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_assertion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_assertion
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]

by tel 15y ago

brazzy 15y ago

On could also see it exactly the other way round: Java's strong typing makes it possible for an IDE to do amazing things, which help you cope with horrible codebases, which in turn makes code viable that would be completely unmanageable in other languages. As for "Java is essentially designed to be impossible to code without an IDE.", I'd say that's a pretty ridiculous statement given the state of art of IDEs at the time Java was designed and became widely used. They did little more than integrate editor, compiler and debugger.

tel 15y ago
Perhaps it just has to do with modern practices and libraries encouraged by modern IDEs. I approached it recently, so I can't speak for times before the IDEs were there. Strong typing is certainly very helpful for making smart compilers and tools---I can't deny that, I'm a Haskell junky. I don't think it's always a best practice though. Being able to handle horrible codebases means that the language/editor environment also allows horrible codebases to survive longer.
- brazzy 15y ago
  That always seemed a really, really unproductive notion to me, that great tools must be bad because they help you deal with problems that would otherwise make you fail sooner.
  - tel 15y ago
    I didn't say IDEs weren't powerful or bad. I indicated the opposite. Sports cars are fantastic. They are really fun to drive. I would start walking if everyone in America had one. Too dangerous.
  - tel 15y ago
    I didn't say IDEs weren't powerful or good in and of themselves. I indicated the opposite. Sports cars are fantastic. They are really fun to drive. I would start walking if everyone in America had one. Too dangerous.
kamaal 15y ago
No Sorry, And please. Almost all Java programmers I've seen so far can barely write any code without IDE, autocompletion and intellisense. Even people who claim to have years of experience in Java. Its just the community is very heavily on IDE side. The libraries, frameworks are all heavy bloats designed with the perspective that IDE is going to take care of that anyway. In other words, Java world without IDE doesn't exist and I presume that is going to be the case for a long time to come. And that is one of the reasons why I never went deep into Java because one tour of eclipse and the best and worst Java programmers both become the same.
- brazzy 15y ago
  Yeah, do keep repeating your bias and prejudices while ignoring conflicting facts pointed out by others, and tell yourself that makes you smart.
  - kamaal 15y ago
    Its neither a bias nor a prejudice. Because I write in Java and Other languages like Python and Perl in my day job. Although I'm trying to run away from Java as quickly as I can. Vast majority of Java programmers can't program without IDE's is a fact. Java being verbose is a fact. Java frameworks being bloated is a fact. Medium to large Java application not being easily handled thorough ordinary tools like text editors is a fact. Its almost like what Dijkstra said couple of decades back about basic. It can destroy your thinking abilities. I don't want to risk mine with too much exposure to autocompletion and intellisense. And without them it makes zero sense to write in Java, as you can no longer be even remotely productive. Well I don't know about others, but I, myself would not like to be bunched in that kind of commodity market of programmers whose only known expertise is 'Knows how to use an IDE'.
    - brazzy 15y ago
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_assertion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_assertion

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]