24 ms·

I believe an underrated factor is the quality of tools (IDEs) available for the language. E.g. imagine refactoring a 50mb source code C# or Java application wit

by damian2000 14y ago

I believe an underrated factor is the quality of tools (IDEs) available for the language. E.g. imagine refactoring a 50mb source code C# or Java application without the help of tools like Visual Studio/Resharper or Eclipse? I remember trying to write a java app in java 1.0 with just a text editor and the command line compiler - it was painful as hell, but things have progressed massively since then..

willvarfar 14y ago
There is also several mentions in the excellent video of how types help refactoring etc.
keeperofdakeys 14y ago
Being an OOP language, the interaction between modules is very explicit. This helps weed out bugs, since "what you wrote" may look close to "what you meant", but is ultimatly violating some rule of the system. This is one of the reasons why I find OOP languages good for large, complex systems, but not for small, hacky programs, since I can't hack around things to implement "just what I want". Javascript defintely fits into the latter category, and requires some good engeering for large projects.
- pjmlp 14y ago
  > Being an OOP language, the interaction between modules is very explicit. This is true in any language that supports modules, not only OOP languages.
- damian2000 14y ago
  I know what you mean and I agree that when used correctly OOP can achieve great modularity, but an OOP-capable language by itself can't protect you from spaghetti code just as horrible as any other non-OOP language could produce.
Tomis02 14y ago
IDE won't help you beyond a certain code size. Good explanation here http://steve-yegge.blogspot.fi/2007/12/codes-worst-enemy.html http://steve-yegge.blogspot.fi/2007/12/codes-worst-enemy.htm...