On Wed, 25 Mar 1998, Scott McDermott wrote:
> If you want to use fragments of other programs, making it `easy' then
> why can't you just use the tools already available to do it? Most
> editors will use multiple buffers and such and you can mix and match
> from/to registers between them. I don't see the need for some GUIfied
> nonsense. I never proposed that anything should be difficult for you :)
Programming is usually difficult enough; why not use everything available
that makes the job easier? Of course, it must actually make the job
easier or faster, else there's not much point in using it.
> > I'm afraid I must also disagree with the above sentiment. If you want
> > to do things the hard way, that is certainly your prerogative, but to
> > denigrate RAD tools by saying they are not "the Unix way" (which is
> > certainly not true) or that they are not for "real" programmers (which is
> > also definitely not true) seems as silly as refusing to use a visual
> > editor because "real men (or women) only use command-line editors--visual
> > editors are for wimps."
>
> Well, I stand by my statement that it's not the Unix way; it really
> isn't. Perhaps there is a reason why there exists so few RAD tools out
> there for Unix? If any at all?
The Unix way (if it could be said that there is such a thing) is, in my
opinion, to use as many existing tools as possible to get the job done.
For example, why write a full-blown application if a simple script with
some calls to grep and sed will do what you need? RAD tools would seem to
fit this mentality well.
I know that RAD tools do exist for various Unices (is that the correct
plural?), but I'm afraid I can't give many detail since I've never had
much use for them myself, and also because I usually stopped listening
after hearing the price. Which, I feel, is the main reason such tools
have not gained widespread popularity under Unix--they tend to be rather
expensive, even for Unix software. If I remember correctly, the
X-Designer software reviewed in Linux Journal was several *thousand*
dollars.
> I would also maintain that someone who just takes code snippets and
> glues them together using point-and-click, maybe sometimes never even
> looking at the code itself but with just generic labels and such, is
> *not* a `real' programmer.
Yes, I agree with you there. What you describe is definitely *not*
programming. But that doesn't mean that it doesn't have its place. As I
said before, why program if there's an easier way (unless you're doing it
just for the fun of it).
However, I could be wrong in my definition of RAD tools, but I always took
the term to include such things as GUI development tools--and by that I
mean tools to develop GUIs. Such tools only generate interface skeletons;
they still require a "real" programmer to add the actual functionality.
And they also allow the programmer to concentrate on those portions of the
project that are actually worthy of his attention rather than waste time
recreating the wheel.
> Perhaps I misconceive RAD tools though, as I've never personally seen
> any in action.
Perhaps I do too. :)
I didn't mean for this to become such a long argument, especially on an
off-topic subject. I think I'll shut up for a while now. :)
Michael
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: All opinions expressed herein are my own and should not
be construed to represent those of Washington University or any other
organization.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael P. Plezbert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Graduate Student http://www.cs.wustl.edu/~plezbert/
Department of Computer Science
Washington University in St. Louis
--
PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES!
http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject.
