On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 2:09 PM, Mohan Parthasarathy wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 12:31 AM, Ulrich Eckhardt > wrote:
>
>> Steve Ferg wrote:
>> > On the one hand, there are developers who love big IDEs with lots of
>> > features (code generation, error checking, etc.), and rely on them to
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 12:31 AM, Ulrich Eckhardt
wrote:
> Steve Ferg wrote:
> > On the one hand, there are developers who love big IDEs with lots of
> > features (code generation, error checking, etc.), and rely on them to
> > provide the high level of support needed to be reasonably productive
>
> I think you mean this clbuttic post:
> http://osteele.com/archives/2004/11/ides
That's it! Thanks very much, Marco!!
It is good to read it again. It is like visiting a place where you
grew up years ago, and finding that it is completely different than
the way you remember it. It is surprisin
Ulrich Eckhardt writes:
>
> That said, an IDE that provides auto-completion (e.g. that gives you a list
> of available class members) is a good thing in Java, because you don't have
> to browse the documentation as often.
While I find at least some types of autocompletion to be laudable
features
Ulrich Eckhardt wrote:
Steve Ferg wrote:
On the one hand, there are developers who love big IDEs with lots of
features (code generation, error checking, etc.), and rely on them to
provide the high level of support needed to be reasonably productive
in heavy-weight languages (e.g. Java).
On the
Chris Rebert wrote:
On the other hand there are developers who much prefer to keep things
light-weight and simple.
Would it be fair to say the first type tends to congregate in herds,
particularly in corporate IT departments, while the latter tends to operate
on a more individual basis?
That
Thanks. Your observations would make good comments on the original
blog message that I'm seeking. Do you have a link to that blog?
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 9:35 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
wrote:
> In message <07e5af6c-d41d-4a4a-8e2e-
> f27bc92c9...@f16g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>, Steve Ferg wrote:
>
>> On the one hand, there are developers who love big IDEs with lots of
>> features (code generation, error checking, etc.), and rely
In message <07e5af6c-d41d-4a4a-8e2e-
f27bc92c9...@f16g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>, Steve Ferg wrote:
> On the one hand, there are developers who love big IDEs with lots of
> features (code generation, error checking, etc.), and rely on them to
> provide the high level of support needed to be reasona
In message , Ulrich Eckhardt wrote:
> If you took a look at Java, you
> would notice that the core language syntax is much simpler than Python's.
I don't think it is. Look at things like "private" versus "protected" versus
"public" with or without "static" and "final", "class" versus "interface"
Hi guys,
I think this issue is long-long displute over tools and IDE-s. No need
to combine it with the question of the complexity of the programming
language used.
I know guys, who did every development project using a simple GVIM and
command line tools, and vere extremly productive. Even in Java
Steve Ferg wrote:
I periodically think of that blog, usually in circumstances that make
me also think "Boy, that guy really got it right". But despite
repeated and prolonged bouts of googling I haven't been able to find
the article again. I must be using the wrong search terms or
something.
D
In article ,
Ulrich Eckhardt wrote:
>Steve Ferg wrote:
>>
>> On the one hand, there are developers who love big IDEs with lots of
>> features (code generation, error checking, etc.), and rely on them to
>> provide the high level of support needed to be reasonably productive
>> in heavy-weight lan
Steve Ferg wrote:
> On the one hand, there are developers who love big IDEs with lots of
> features (code generation, error checking, etc.), and rely on them to
> provide the high level of support needed to be reasonably productive
> in heavy-weight languages (e.g. Java).
>
> On the other hand the
A few years ago someone, somewhere on the Web, posted a blog in which
he observed that developers, by general temperament, seem to fall into
two groups.
On the one hand, there are developers who love big IDEs with lots of
features (code generation, error checking, etc.), and rely on them to
provid
15 matches
Mail list logo
