The IDE divide

[BernardChhun]

Here's a great article by Oliver Steele on the IDE divide. http://osteele.com/archives/2004/11/ides

It's explaining why some of us uses plain text editors such as VIM, nano or notepad to code versus those that uses Eclipse or Visual Studio.

With that said, I'm probably a Language-Maven type of developer. I tend to read the source code and learn the patterns in it before peaking at the documentation. In fact, I've always perceived any kinda docs as an unwanted sunday house chores. There are some exceptions but most of them makes me feel that way.

[jay@moduscreate.com]

Any plain text editor will work. I use Dreamweaver only because of the color coding a nd th ability to easily open multiple documents in tabs. I use vim for bash and perl scripting though. So i have no problems using vim whatsoever. I dislike vi and notepad mainly because of the ancient black and white text.

[cilquirm]

I can go on about the beauty of dynamic languages ( and often do ), but really, what it comes down to for me is the fact that i have to do multiple tasks with multiple contexts on any given day.

I could be writing javascript, java, sql, hql, groovy, etc.. on any given day. I use a tool like Eclipse because it lets me switch contexts easily and efficiently, not because I prefer the tool to do the work for me.

Of course, any tool used consisently will provide people with an easier reach to 'flow state'. I have tons of friends in the financial industry who enter a trancelike state when working in Excel.

It also seems to me that 'language mavens' are the types to argue why you should use this particular language over that particular language, whereas 'tool mavens' care about just the right language for the job and getting it done.

[jay@moduscreate.com]

^^^ Glad i'm not the only one having to master multiple languages.

I'm required to be able to write bash, perl, php, sql, plsql, javascript.


I have a ton of references from o'reilly.

[BernardChhun]

It also seems to me that 'language mavens' are the types to argue why you should use this particular language over that particular language, whereas 'tool mavens' care about just the right language for the job and getting it done.

aren't those prejudices? :-? it seems to me you make it sound like "language mavens" don't get things done. ;) And I know some developpers that relies so much on their IDEs they can't code at all without it.

anyways...I hope this won't go the "endless arguing" road!

[pyrolupus]

I know some developpers that relies so much on their IDEs they can't code at all without it.
Heh, I'm a developer on an ASP.Net web app, and I use Visual Studio for compiling and debugging. I do my "typing" in UltraEdit (http://ultraedit.com). (Visual Studio's background VB compiler gets very, very bogged down in our enormous monolithic solution. (We'll modularize it soon. Promise.))

Pyro

[BernardChhun]

Hey Pyro,

I wasn't targeting any language in particular when I said that. :) In the end, being a language maven or a tool maven doesn't matter at all. It all depends on the developper's skills. and skills are acquired through raw coding experiences.

[pyrolupus]

Sorry, I was too vague: I meant that I couldn't get any work done with my IDE. Thus the external editor. ;)

Pyro

[eVizions]

I'm probably jumping in a little late on this conversation, but if you're a basic notepad-type user, but need syntax highlighting and tabs, have you ever tried Notepad++? I use Eclipse on occasion, but for the most part I use Notepad++ for HTML, Javascript, PHP, MySQL, etc. and it highlights everything. And it's a HELL of a lot less resource intensive than Dreamweaver.

[pyrolupus]

...if you're a basic notepad-type user, but need syntax highlighting and tabs, have you ever tried Notepad++?
There are numerous threads on here about editors. ^^ My own preferred editor, UltraEdit (http://idmcomp.com) (which I mentioned in my earlier post), is just another hyped-up text editor, not unlike Notepad++. There is at least one guy on my team who's using Notepad++ for the stuff I do with UEStudio. (But mine's better! Yuh-huh! Is too!)

Along a similar vein (to the original topic), another co-worker and I have had an ongoing dialog about when and where to use the MS Ajax client-side tools versus Ext. I keep beating the Ext drum, but our differences come right down to this IDE divide thing: I prefer Ext (and jQuery) specifically because they are more powerful. He likes the fact that the MS Ajax toolkit integrates almost seamlessly into the Visual Studio IDE.

The MS Ajax controls are extremely easy to drop onto the page, and they allow him to use exactly the same server-side code as he always has. Since they do "partial postbacks," they take care of updating the page's ViewState, as well, which keeps everything nicely in synch.

The Ext controls, on the other hand, are far, far richer and more complete, but they require setting properties and executing methods directly in the client script (or, more likely, outputting appropriate client script via server side). I strongly prefer this, because I don't like mixing my client code with server code: though the MSAjax stuff is easy to start with (they always are), I presume from experience that making them behave differently from the Redmond team's vision becomes problematic. Essentially, the apparent ease of use comes with a price.

We're still at the beginning stages of making our (ASP.Net) application richer on the client side, and I'm working hard to try to get Ext included in the plans and coding guidelines.

Hmm. I'm waxing out of the "hey, language is cooler than tools" topic and into ye olde "Ext/ASP.Net/MS Ajax" topic. Sorry.

Language rules! Rock on, languages! Rawr! ^_-

Pyro

[harley.333]

I agree with Pyro whole-heartedly (both about the language vs tools and MS-techniques vs Ext). I was a strict Windows-only programmer until .Net beta 1 came out. The company I was at jumped on Web apps and suddenly I was an ASP.Net programmer. I was pretty impressed with the all the ASP.Net controls and how easy Visual Studio made everything.

Once all the initial coolness wore off, we tried to make some customizations and the tools (Visual Studio) just couldn't handle it. I taught myself how to work with the tool and make the tool generate the code I wanted. In the end, I decided it was MUCH easier to simply write my own code. But the true deciding factor for dropping the tool and going straight to language was the fact that a tool (any tool) is completely generic. Therefore, its generated code is in a bubble and standalone from most other generated code.

For example, an ASP.Net combo box doesn't know that there are ten other ASP.Net combo boxes with identical contents on the same page. Obviously, the tool can become smarter and solve individual problems as they arise. But somebody (usually, you), has to make the tool smarter and solve this problem for the tool.

I prefer to simply solve the problem for myself, instead of working for the tool.