On Wednesday, 28 January 2015 at 23:22:34 UTC, ketmar wrote:
On Wed, 28 Jan 2015 18:54:27 +0000, Zach the Mystic wrote:
I think a keyword is a keyword is a keyword. If it's a keyword
to the
right it should be one everywhere. How is somethign that's a
built-in
attribute one place and an identifier in another not context
sensitive.
yep. that is "slave to the machine" approach. i don't really
care how
hard machine should work to understand what i want. ;-)
i.e. i can't see why i have to deal with problems of
compiler/tool/editor
author. it's easy -- at least in this case -- for human to see
where
keywords are keywords. machine can see that too with some
analysis. yet
somehow situation is horribly reversed: instead of machine
helping me to
do what i want, that's me who must obey the machine orders and
do the
work that machine can do for me.
That is a retarded mindset. It is not about how hard it is for
the machine, but for tool writer.
I know many people look down on java, but quite frankly, the
tooling is just way better than pretty much anything else. One
could argue this is because of corporate support, but other
languages like C++ also have important corporate support. And
still, C++ tooling mostly suck. Honestly, pretty anything except
C# tooling suck in comparison.
The problem of the tool writer is your problem, because any tool
that isn't written is work you need to yourself. And then who's
the slave to the machine ?
