Yes, yes, I know, I know. While I'm no vi or emacs guru, I've paired
(for a fair amount of time) with experienced VI and Emacs users.
Snippets, Ctags etc. help a great deal - but have you ever worked with
an AST aware development environment where you can safely make
structural changes across your entire codebase?
Try extracting an Interface from a Class and replace all references to
the class with references to the interface across a 5000 class codebase
by hand in a few seconds, without a single error afterward. How about
add a parameter to a constructor, and have all references to said
constructor changed? You can do all that and more with IntelliJ.
The thing is, code should be like clay in the hands of a hacker; the
fact that we have to deal with the AST via a text 'view' *really* slows
us down. We often hesitate to make necessary changes because the manual
effort involved in getting the refactoring done, and then testing it
afterward for bugs is non-trivial. Even a simple 'Rename Class'
refactoring can become a chore in a large codebase.
The guys at Intentional and JetBrains are taking a serious shot at
letting us mould the AST directly - but until their efforts reach
maturity, IntelliJ is the closest we're going to get to it (and its
going to be open source soon). I'm happy to demo it sometime, too. Don't
diss it until you've tried it, preferably on a non toy project.
Best,
Sidu.
Anand Balachandran Pillai wrote:
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:06 PM, Darkseid <lorddae...@gmail.com> wrote:
2. It's easy to hire an IDE-aware monkey to do programming in "proven
technology"
I do most of my work in Ruby (and have done for a few years now). Every day
I bemoan the lack of a powerful refactoring IDE like Java has in IntelliJ. A
good IDE is a massive productivity booster; you can only get so far with a
text editor*, no matter how many macros you have set up. Honestly.
On E M A C S since 1998 and not doing very bad either...
Best,
Sidu.
http://blog.sidu.in
http://twitter.com/ponnappa
* This is especially true of USD1800 text editors like Visual Studio.
Pradeep Gowda wrote:
That's what the big boys of the world wants you to believe. I had met a
very
senior official in the government a techy himself and spent 3 hours
showing
him virtues of Python and Django, hoping that they will change the RFP
terms.
I found out yesterday that the application has to be developed on a
proven
technology like Java,C++ or C#. When I spoke to the gentleman he said his
consultant said that dynamically typed languages are not safe for mission
critical work. The work is far from being mission-critical is another
point
altogether.....
That's because "big boys" define the market suitable to themselves.
1. it's easier to code more, take more time when using "proven technology"
2. It's easy to hire an IDE-aware monkey to do programming in "proven
technology".
Anyway, one answer to "proven technology" bugaboo is Jython and
IronPython. It's still Java(platform) and .NET
with bi-directional compatibility.
+PG
_______________________________________________
BangPypers mailing list
BangPypers@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/bangpypers
_______________________________________________
BangPypers mailing list
BangPypers@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/bangpypers
_______________________________________________
BangPypers mailing list
BangPypers@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/bangpypers
