This is an interesting point.... http://www.quora.com/Do-people-still-write-and-compile-programs-from-the-command-line-instead-of-an-IDE-Why-or-why-not
Like Simon Willison <http://www.quora.com/Simon-Willison> so eloquently puts it - not relying on gives you superpowers. After you reach a certain level of skill as a programmer, an IDE starts slowing you down, rather than the opposite. I remember my time as a .NET developer - even though I was REALLY into using a lot of powerful refactoring tools such as ReSharper, Visual Studio still slowed be down in the end. It's a big, complex multi-gigabyte tool that start pretty slowly, takes ages to install, and I quite often found myself waiting for it while it performed some unfathomable computation in the background. All things that make you lose flow. Compare this to me nowadays, developing node.js using Sublime Text. The server reloads in milliseconds. Sublime loads in a second or two. I run tests and compile stuff with small batch scripts that I've written myself. I develop at*insane* speed compared to a few years back. *Back them, I was driving around a battlecruiser, trying to swat flies with it. Nowadays, I'm a ninja that can cut the flies precisely with my katana.* Oh, and if you like my writing, don't miss out on more of it - follow me on Quora and Twitter (http://twitter.com/mpjme) *Michael Ridland | Technical Director | Xamarin MVP* XAM Consulting - Mobile Technology Specialists www.xam-consulting.com Blog: www.michaelridland.com On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 2:48 PM, Greg Keogh <[email protected]> wrote: > Oh! TypeScript ... I forgot about that. I see a new project wizard > template in VS2015, so I might as well lick it and see what happens. > > What you've all been saying is interesting about productivity and trends > and such, but one overriding issue keeps slapping me: JavaScript is the > wrong tool to construct any serious application. Notice is called java > *Script*. It's a technically wonderful example of a dynamic scripting > language, which combined with its slightly functional feel means you can > mould it into almost anything, which has happened many times over (too many > times!). As my code expanded yesterday I felt like I was building an > airplane out of string and glue, at which point I threw in the towel. Lack > of an IDE just compounded the situation. > > As a refresher, read the article on Shell script > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_script> which has some sobering > generally applicable comments further down about the advantages and limits > of scripting. > > *GK* > > *Many modern shells also supply various features usually found only in > more sophisticated general-purpose programming languages, such as > control-flow constructs, variables, comments, arrays, subroutine and so on. > With these sorts of features available, it is possible to write reasonably > sophisticated applications as shell scripts. However, they are still > limited by the fact that most shell languages have little or no support for > data typing systems, classes, threading, complex math, and other common > full language features, and are also generally much slower than compiled > code or interpreted languages written with speed as a performance goal.* > > *Shell scripts often serve as an initial stage in software development, > and are often subject to conversion later to a different underlying > implementation...* > > On 10 August 2015 at 14:19, David Connors <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Mon, 10 Aug 2015 at 13:39 Scott Barnes <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I disagree, i think people are constantly asking the "better" question. >>> >> >> [ ... ] >> >> but i'd argue that if the devs had the choice over ECMA 6, CSS3 and HTML5 >>> vs ECMA 3x, CSS2 and HTML5 ...i'd probably guess what the $100 spends would >>> bring back, that is better typescript style language support which would >>> ideally compliment their practices and behaviours today (plus tooling could >>> probably lock onto better more focused patterns of code). >>> >>> If you can argue (or anyone) that breadth has no factoring into the >>> JavaScript as a nominated "answer" then I'd be curious to see how you avoid >>> that subject. It has to be the driver behind its adoption. >>> >> >> I think JS' breadth IS why it is the "answer". >> >> I have turned into a pragmatist in my middle age and would look straight >> past the fact that it is software engineering arse and embrace it and look >> to what breadth does for shareholder returns. >> >> David. >> >> >> >> >> -- >> David Connors >> [email protected] | @davidconnors | LinkedIn | +61 417 189 363 >> > >
