OT: on IDEs and code writing on steroids

[Yigal Chripun]

BCS wrote:
> Reply to Daniel,
> 
>> Yigal Chripun wrote:
>>
>>> BCS wrote:
>>>
>>>>> one other thing, this thread discusses also the VS project files.
>>>>> This is completely irrelevant. those XML files are VS specific and
>>>>> their complexity is MS' problem. Nothing prevents a developer from
>>>>> using different build tools like make, rake or scons with their C#
>>>>> sources since VS comes with a command line compiler. the issue is
>>>>> not the build tool but rather the compilation model itself.
>>>>>
>>>> I think you are in error here as the c# files don't contain enough
>>>> information for the compiler to know where to resolve symbols. You
>>>> might be able to get away with throwing every single
>>>> .cs/.dll/whatever file in the project at the compiler all at once.
>>>> (Now if you want to talk about archaic!) Aside from that, how can it
>>>> find meta-data for your types?
>>>>
>>> you're mistaken since there are build tools that support C#. I think
>>> I saw this in Scons last time I looked.
>>>
>> Maybe you should back up your statements instead of just guessing.
>>
>> http://www.scons.org/wiki/CsharpBuilder
>>
>> Oh look, you have to list all the source files because C# source files
>> *do not contain enough information*.
>>
>> A C# source file containing "using Foo.Bar;" tells you exactly ZERO
>> about what other files it depends on.
>>
>> -- Daniel
>>
> 
> Exactly. The only practical way to deal with C# is an IDE or build 
> system of some kind that is aware of C#. You /can/ deal with it by hand 
> but IMHO that would be about half way from D to using C without even a 
> make file or build script.
> 
> 

first, thanks Daniel for the evidence I missed.
BCS wrote that a programmer needs to compile all the source files at 
once to make it work without an IDE. as I already said, he's wrong, and 
Daniel provided the proof above.

sure, you don't get the full power of an IDE that can track all the 
source files in the project for you. That just means that it's worth the 
money you pay for it.

you can write makefiles or what ever (scons, rake, ant, ...) in the same 
way you'd do for C and C++. In other words:
if you prefer commnad line tools you get the same experience and if you 
  do use an IDE you get a *much* better experience.
same goes for D - either write your own makefile or use rebuild which 
uses the compiler front-end to parse the source files just like you 
suggested above for C#.

where in all of that, do you see any contradiction to what I said?
again, I said the D compilation model is ancient legacy and should be 
replaced and that has nothing to do with the format you prefer for your 
build scripts.