Jay Pipes wrote:
Jim Starkey wrote:
Jobin Augustine wrote:
it appears that you hard core hackers never uses IDEs.
anybody using them ?
It all depends on what you call hard core hackers.
Originally, hard core hackers were the guys that trampled the cutting
edge of technology with audacity. They pushed the limits and weren't
afraid to experiment. They developed OSes like Tenex and Unix,
eschewing assembler in favor of high level languages, even when they
had to invent the language to so. These hard core hackers were
willing to try anything that appeared on the scene -- objects,
exception handling, formal interfaces, and, yes, IDEs. The the stuff
that worked got used and the stuff that didn't got left behind
(Objective C, anyone? Ada?).
If you mean the contemporary definition of hard core hacker --
arrested development adolescents -- then no, they're content to use
the first rock they picked up to bang on other rocks, and are content
to use vi and line mode debuggers and are perfectly happy to reset
the same damn breakpoints after every build. They also think that an
800 lines of nested flag testing is the very pinnacle of software
engineering. These are the guys who can take three years and
hundreds of man years to put out a maintenance release with more bugs
than when it started without asking what went wrong...
I can't fathom why some troglodytes are so proud of the ignorance of
Windows that they're unwilling to even try a different development
technology.
Oh, well. At least it keeps these people from creating new products.
I sincerely hope you weren't referring to me or anyone in the Drizzle
contributor community in the above statements. We try on this mailing
list to keep the humour above the belt.
-jay
p.s. For the record, I was a software developer using Windows
platforms for years before I began using and developing open source
software. And, yes, I used VisualStudio and other IDEs when I did so.
That said, I am more productive and efficient, not to mention more
knowledgeable about the underpinnings of software, now that I do not
use an IDE and instead use the tools of the GNU toolchain and vim.
But, this is my own personal opinion of my productivity. Everyone
makes there own choices about what tools make them most productive,
and there's nothing wrong with that at all.
No, I wasn't referring to drizzle, I was referring to MySQL. But still,
drizzle remains, by choice, in the dark ages. I continue to be
astonished that people care more about line length than reducing the
amount of spaghetti code by encapsulating things like values and
exceptions and recognizing that "plug-ins" that have to be not only
compiled on the code base, but compiled with the code base are worthy of
the name. Drizzle has been slightly successful in reducing complexity
by shedding badly designed components, but has been seemingly unwilling
to take on the more important issues of modularization, encapsulation,
streamlining of execution phase, etc.
Over the summer I came to the conclusion the NimbusDB development would
never be predictable without a multi-process / multi-node / multi-thread
point and click debugger. So I wrote one. Even though the target
environment is 64 bit linux, it was vastly faster and easier to write
and debug the GUI, elf, and dwarf components in Visual Studio. The
Linux elf standard turns out to be a pack of lies, so I had to spend a
great amount of time running gdb compiled for debugging under gdb to
scope out reality (hint: the frame description entry (FDE) in the ELF
unwind section has an undocumented subfield), so I'm a little sensitive
on the subject of debuggers and the relative productivity thereof.
--
Jim Starkey
Founder, NimbusDB, Inc.
978 526-1376
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss
Post to : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
