OT: on IDEs and code writing on steroids

Christopher Wright dhasenan at gmail.com
Sun May 17 18:40:30 PDT 2009

Ary Borenszweig wrote:
> BCS escribió:
>> Hello Georg,
>>> So, in a way, Microsoft may be right in assuming that (especially when
>>> their thinking anyway is that everybody sits at a computer that's
>>> totally dedicated to the user's current activity anyhow) preposterous
>>> horse power is (or, should be) available at the code editor.
>> I think that any real programing project now days (regardless of 
>> language) needs tools to help the programmer. The difference between D 
>> and C# is that with D you /can/ get away without an IDE and with C# 
>> you won't get much at all done without one.
> I can't agree with this. Most of the time I use an IDE for the 
> autocompletion, not much for the build-and-jump-to-error stuff. And I 
> don't see D being easier with regards to remembering what's the name of 
> that function, which members does a class have, in which module are all 
> these.
> Why do you say that with D you can get away without an IDE and with C# 
> you can't? I think you can do the same as in C#, don't use an IDE and 
> get away with pretty much everything, except you'll be slower at it 
> (same goes for D without an IDE).

The more boilerplate code a language requires, the more important it is 
to have an IDE. Features that a language provides that allow you to 
write less code make an IDE less important.

I really like IDEs. They let me think less when creating code.

Of course, the other feature is notifying the user about errors sooner 
than their next compile. This saves a lot of time, regardless of whether 
your language requires significant cruft or not.

More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list