UTC, so wrote:
No one said you shouldn't use IDE or any other tool, but i don't think it is healthy to design a language with such assumptions. Walter himself was against this and stated why he doesn't like Java way of doing things, one of the reason was the language was relying on IDEs.

Well then I disagree with Walter on this as well. What's wrong with having a "standard" toolset in the same way you have standard libraries? It's unrealistic to think people (at large) will be writing any sort of serious application outside of a modern IDE. I'm not saying it's Walters job to write IDE integration, only that the language design shouldn't cater to the smaller use-case scenario.

Cleaner code is easier to read and, within an IDE with tooltips, makes little difference when looking at the hierarchy. If you want to be hard-core about it, no one is stopping you from explicitly qualifying each definition.

Reply via email to