OT: on IDEs and code writing on steroids
none at anon.com
Tue May 26 19:13:22 PDT 2009
> BCS Wrote:
>> What I want is a language where most of the time you build a project
>> from only the information in the source code.
> There is nothing in C# that stops you doing exactly this.
> You can build this Simple.cs file:
> to create a Simple.exe using nothing but this command line:
> csc.exe /r:System.dll; D:\temp\simple.cs
Most any language has what I want for single file programs. But when you
start getting dozens of file in a project (including some file mixed into
the working directory that shouldn't be included) it breaks down.
>> What I don't want is a language where the only way to keep track of
>> the information you need to build a project, is with an external data
> People have been developing projects using an "external data file" for
> decades. It's called the make file.
C doesn't have the property I want, although it's not as bad as c# because
makefiles are intended to be edited by hand. I'd rather not need make at
all until I start having extra language build steps (yacc, rpm/deb generation,
regression tests, etc.).
>> I don't want that because the only practical way to do that is
>> _force_ the programmer to use an IDE and have it maintain that file.
> What exactly is it about C# that makes you think you are FORCED to use
> an IDE to write the code?
The only practical way to keep track for what files do and do not get compiled
is a .csproj file and the only resonable way to mantain them is VS or the
> MSBuild.exe is nothing than Microsoft's replacement to make.exe.
> It is nothing more than a version of make.exe that takes XML make
> files as it's input.
More information about the Digitalmars-d