3 ms·
A good tool does not need to throwaway existing frameworks or paradigms in order to deliver. I am a firm believer in using what's already proven. >The complexi
by Edmond 13y ago
A good tool does not need to throwaway existing frameworks or paradigms in order to deliver. I am a firm believer in using what's already proven.
>The complexity of the tools we use is a result of their great flexibility and power.
This may see like a strength but it is actually a massive weakness. Existing IDEs attempt to be all things to all people and as a result are not actually delivering the best that they could if they were more focused.
>Given that, does anyone think they can do better?
Download our software (check my profile for link) and spend some time playing with it, you might just reconsider that position :)
Or join the newsletter, we are coming out with an exciting update that is basically going to attempt to combine wordpress-like application composition within an IDE.
- jarrett 13y agoI looked at Crudzilla. (Is that the product you're referring to?) I don't really have the time to test-run a new framework right now. Perhaps you could give a quick overview of how you're solving the key problem I identified above? To recap, my argument is: The web stack must be flexible and powerful, because nobody's abstraction layer can anticipate the weird, idiosyncratic little needs of most real-world projects. Thus, the flexibility and power of the dominant tools, like Rails and Django, can't be sacrificed in the name of simplicity. Or if you do make that sacrifice, your tool will only be useful to the tiny subset of applications that fit into your narrow definition of how an app works or what it does.