By reading the next paragraph: ------------------------- We have a development (tool) called NetBeans that Sun bought. It was architected from the beginning to be a framework. It's a flexible system we open sourced a year and a half ago. And so I'm building a plug-in for NetBeans. ---------------------------------------
I guess what Gosling meant is that he expects something like NetBeans to be the ideal IDE. However, if the bean concept is what I saw in VisualAge, then I would rather stick to Emacs at least for servlet development. I don't want to maintain 2,000 lines of beans codes for what can be done by 200 in plain old Emacs... Peter Woo. ""Molitor, Stephen"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message A35A461EBB6BD511859E0002A56B89CC01CDBBF7@EXCORP03">news:A35A461EBB6BD511859E0002A56B89CC01CDBBF7@EXCORP03... > > Yeah, I was confused by that too. He could have meant 'low-end' to mean > 'low-level', but in the previous sentence he defined 'low-level developer' > to mean "people who are not experts at writing code". (So, why are they > writing code?) I guess that would mean people who are more comfortable > using a point-and-clicky ide that generates code for them. The standard > criticism of Emacs is that is great for developers who *know* how to write > low-level code, but doesn't have enough point-and-clicky for newbies. > > I read somewhere that Arthur van Huff uses Emacs. (Is he one of those > 'low-level', Emacs using developers who is not an expert at writing code?) > I wonder if he uses JDE, or if any of the other Sun guys use JDE. > > Steve Molitor > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jeff J Jensen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2002 10:45 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Gosling interview > > > Thanks for the link; interesting read. > > Unless I interpret JG's answer incorrectly(?), I think the opposite: Emacs > is not for the low end developer. > > > Thomas L Roche writes: > > > http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t269-s2102856,00.html >
