I am with Charlie on a lot of this. I joke often about just using notepad but that's not something I really would want to do. I would be inclined for a "visual studio: the good parts" edition however. Preferably a light weight stand alone editor with good refactoring help (mostly for speed). I've been doing a little bit of spiking fun in linqpad lately and using the c# program template to try a few things out, along with trying a little F#. This feels a lot like what I would prefer to use. An environment I could easily drop on a thumb drive and go to town with.
Just some thoughts on the topic. On Nov 16, 2010 8:05 PM, "Charlie Poole" <[email protected]> wrote: > Well of course you *can* work with just notepad and the SDK. > > Personally, I'd prefer a better editor than notepad though. > > Charlie > > On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 7:49 PM, Justin Bozonier <[email protected]> wrote: >> What if we could develop .NET programs without any IDE... just Notepad >> and a heart filled with hope? It'd be hawt that's what! >> >> I've been ruminating on why I feel so much more productive in Ruby >> land and on how I can bring some of that to the MS development stack. >> One of the big pain points for me is Visual Studio and all of its >> project and solution files. >> >> At first I thought it was the fact Ruby doesn't compile.. That's nice >> but not **huge**... Python compiles after all... Then I realized one >> of the big things Visual Studio (along with R#) helps me do is find my >> classes and files. I've seen leaning on Visual Studio cause an >> enormous loss of cohesion across packages which forms a self- >> reinforcing cycle of needing even more Visual Studio packagement. >> >> This is an experiment I've been working with over the past couple >> research days that was a thought of what could be done to reduce that >> pain. It's a Ruby script you can run in a folder to compile all c# >> files and execute them as though they were a set of scripts and >> modules. It's VERY simplistic and I only consider it a proof of >> concept but still I'd like to hear some of your thoughts on this. >> Ideally, I'd like to be able to develop an entire C# application only >> using this technique. >> >> You can get a rough idea of what's going on inside the tests but I did >> a bad job testing. So ask questions if you got 'em. >> >> Anyone else with thoughts on this or other ways of doing truly >> "Alt" .NET development? :) >> >> The git: https://github.com/jcbozonier/IronLove >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Seattle area Alt.Net" group. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]<altnetseattle%[email protected]> . >> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/altnetseattle?hl=en. >> >> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Seattle area Alt.Net" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]<altnetseattle%[email protected]> . > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/altnetseattle?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Seattle area Alt.Net" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/altnetseattle?hl=en.
