On Monday, September 14, 2015 at 8:56:31 AM UTC-4, J Luis wrote: > > > >>> I'm have many years of experience with Matlab and find its IDE a >>> can't-work-without-it tool. When one experiments its debugger the reason >>> becomes obvious. >>> >>> >> Do you claim that Fortran, C and Perl never achieved success until >> someone wrote an IDE with a built-in debugger? ... Yeah, I know that's not >> what you want to say. Please understand that even if you find an IDE >> indispensable for Matlab, that doesn't make IDEs indispensable for all >> people for all languages. The fair thing to say about IDEs is that they are >> a really good idea to have because there are people who really really want >> them. >> >> Daniel >> > > You have to admit that it's not fair to do such comparisons for the simple > fact that when those languages started (and long long time after) IDEs like > we are talking simply did not exist. Not that they do, you can't live > without them. I do but with pain and let just don't forget that we are > talking of general acceptance and not only the "Carnival of hackers". >
Did not exist? The most *totally* integrated development environment I've used in my life was the Lisp Machine, and that was 35 years ago, long before many of the languages on that list. Can IDEs be good, and very useful? Yes (but to really be productive, you need to have a full featured editor integrated also). I'm hopeful about things like Atom and Nuclide (which is built on top of Atom). Keno Fischer is adding the debugger support that's been lacking in Julia (Gallium.jl), although that's still at the alpha stage (hats off to both Keno and Blackrock for funding him on the project)
