Inheritance of purity
foobar
foo at bar.com
Sun Feb 26 00:57:52 PST 2012
On Sunday, 26 February 2012 at 01:18:55 UTC, James Miller wrote:
> On Feb 26, 2012 8:53 AM, "foobar" <foo at bar.com> wrote:
>>
>> That's analogous to saying that you don't want to depend on a
>> lighter
> since you can make your own fire by rubbing a stone with a wood
> stick. A
> lighter does tie you to a certain technology but loosing the
> lighter
> doesn't make for more productivity. Misuse of the tool or using
> the wrong
> one sure could hamper productivity but that's hardly the fault
> of
> technology.
>>
> No, its analogous to not using a lighter that only lights
> evergreens, and
> only works in Europe. Again, this is blatantly the view that
> there there is
> either notepad or vs, ignoring the masses of features of the
> editors in
> between. I've used vs, I don't find it to have many features -
> that I use -
> that vim doesn't.
I see the analogy went over your head. Besides, what's wrong with
a lighter that only works in Europe? Works perfectly fine for me!
:)
>
>> The above regarding MS is incorrect. MS has lots of automation
>> and is far
> better at it than *nix systems are. Its Powershell is superior
> to the *nix
> "everything is a file" ideology and there were several attempts
> to copy the
> concept to *nix with Python and Ruby.
>
> Im not even sure what you're getting at here, I didn't realise
> powershell
> had an ideology, I don't think bash does either. And sure
> powershell, a
> nonstandard add-on, is good. Try automating something that
> wasn't made by
> microsoft though, try doing administration of it remotely
> without rdp.
>>
>>>
>>> Programming a craft as much as it is a process. I tend to
>>> liken it to
>>> carpentry, you have set steps, you design and plan and build
>>> etc, but
>>> there's creativity there. As such, programmers (I've found)
>>> tend to
>>> pick an environment that suits them best. I use a minimal
>>> system that
>>> I can configure and hack to my heart's content. My colleague
>>> uses a
>>> Macbook pro that he never shuts down. The designer here uses
>>> a Macbook
>>> Air. And we all work fine, there is no "One True Way" to make
>>> a chair,
>>> why should there be one for writing a program?
>>>
>>> My point is that the tools that programmers use, like
>>> compilers and
>>> linkers and parser-generators and build systems and
>>> deployment tools
>>> and source control and x and y and z and .... are going to be
>>> used by
>>> a wide range of people, in a wide range of environments, for
>>> a wide
>>> range of purposes, so they should keep in mind that maybe you
>>> /don't/
>>> have a certain tool or feature available. So you make sure
>>> that the
>>> experience at the lowest common denominator, a vt100
>>> terminal, is
>>> acceptable, maybe not perfect, but good enough, then you
>>> build from
>>> there. If that means that D is geared towards less typing,
>>> then good,
>>> especially if you can do the extra typing and not break
>>> things. It
>>> /is/ possible to make everybody mostly happy, and that is by
>>> aiming at
>>> the people using `cat`* to program and hitting the people
>>> using VS
>>> along the way.
>>>
>>> * Programming using `cat` is not recommended.**
>>> ** Even though /real/ programmers use `cat`
>>>
>>> --
>>> James Miller
>>
>>
>> I disagree. Simply put:
>>
>> +---------+ +---------+
>> | Magic | | comfort |
>> | happens | | zone |
>> | here! | +---------+
>> +---------+
>>
>> Magic cannot happen here ^.
>
> What on earth does this mean? In the context it seems to
> suggest that I
> should be struggling to learn a new environment if I want to do
> something
> amazing.
>
> I'm guessing you meant that I should try something new, but
> that doesn't
> need to be the editor. It's far more interesting to try to
> build outside of
> my "comfort zone".
>
> In fact, your grade-school platitude annoys me, it suggests
> that I'm stuck
> in my ways and avoiding new tech because I like my terminal. I
> started in
> IDEs, and worked my way down. I also have the most fun working
> outside my
> comfort zone and doing something new, spending hours looking at
> code going
> "why wont you work! Why do you hate me!" Then finally getting a
> breakthrough... amazing.
>
> --
> James Miller
The picture is both a simple fact of life and in our current
discussion a response to the above attitude of "lowest common
denominator". I'm suggesting that progress is made by progressing
forward and not by retreating backwards.
Your agitated response suggests I hit a nerve. That's a sign that
my post had an effect.
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list