OT: on IDEs and code writing on steroids

[Lutger]

Yigal Chripun wrote:

...
> IMO, designing the language to support this better work-flow is a good 
> decision made by MS, and D should follow it instead of trying to get 
> away without an IDE.

I'm not sure about this. D is designed to be easier to parse than C++ 
(but that's saying nothing) to allow better tools made for it. I think this 
should be enough. 

C# & friends not only better supports working inside an IDE, but makes it a pain to 
do without. Autocomplete dictates that related functions should be named with
the exact same prefix - even when this isn't logical. It also encourages names to be 
as descriptive as possible, in practice leading to a part of the api docs encoded in 
the function name. Extremely bloated names are the consequence of this. It doesn't 
always make code more readable imho. 

The documentation comments are in xml: pure insanity. I tried to generate documentation 
for my stuff at work once, expecting to be done in max 5 min. like ddoc. Turns out nobody at 
work uses documentation generation for a reason: it isn't really fleshed out and one-click
from the IDE, in fact it is a pain in the arse compared to using ddoc.

I should stop now before this turns into a rant.