Re: [BangPypers] But IDEs rock! (was Google Go)
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 9:21 PM, Darkseid wrote: > Yes, yes, I know, I know. While I'm no vi or emacs guru, I've paired (for a > fair amount of time) with experienced VI and Emacs users. Snippets, Ctags > etc. help a great deal - but have you ever worked with an AST aware > development environment where you can safely make structural changes across > your entire codebase? I'd much prefer an AST aware code refactoring tool which my editor can interface with rather than something built into my editor. Separate components that communicate with each other etc. The whole UNIX thing.* I'll admit that I not very much into the agile workflow so refactoring is not something I do heavily. Perhaps I'd see things differently if that was the case. I'd also like to use the same 'editor' for all my text-typing needs (that includes code, email, documentation, essays, blogs, IRC etc.). It's quite nice to have the same keystrokes, macros and other things work consistently in all places where I have to type. You probably know what I use by now. :) [..] * Since this came up (and I think I've already mentioned this to you), you should check out the wily editor - http://www.cse.yorku.ca/~oz/wily/. Not just refactoring, but it even delegates global search/replace to an external process. :) -- ~noufal http://nibrahim.net.in ___ BangPypers mailing list BangPypers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/bangpypers
Re: [BangPypers] But IDEs rock! (was Google Go)
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 10:51 AM, Darkseid wrote: > Yes, yes, I know, I know. While I'm no vi or emacs guru, I've paired (for a > fair amount of time) with experienced VI and Emacs users. Snippets, Ctags > etc. help a great deal - but have you ever worked with an AST aware > development environment where you can safely make structural changes across > your entire codebase? > > Try extracting an Interface from a Class and replace all references to the > class with references to the interface across a 5000 class codebase by hand > in a few seconds, without a single error afterward. How about add a > parameter to a constructor, and have all references to said constructor > changed? You can do all that and more with IntelliJ. > > The thing is, code should be like clay in the hands of a hacker; the fact > that we have to deal with the AST via a text 'view' *really* slows us down. > We often hesitate to make necessary changes because the manual effort > involved in getting the refactoring done, and then testing it afterward for > bugs is non-trivial. Even a simple 'Rename Class' refactoring can become a > chore in a large codebase. > > The guys at Intentional and JetBrains are taking a serious shot at letting > us mould the AST directly - but until their efforts reach maturity, IntelliJ > is the closest we're going to get to it (and its going to be open source > soon). I'm happy to demo it sometime, too. Don't diss it until you've tried > it, preferably on a non toy project. > Do I sense a pining for LISP here? AST, clay etc., ;) I have heard great things about IntelliJ IDEA. I'll give it a shot in my next Java foray. AFAIK, the open source, community edition of IDEA is going to have a subset of the features. ___ BangPypers mailing list BangPypers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/bangpypers
Re: [BangPypers] But IDEs rock! (was Google Go)
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:06 PM, Darkseid wrote: >> >> 2. It's easy to hire an IDE-aware monkey to do programming in "proven >> technology" > > I do most of my work in Ruby (and have done for a few years now). Every day > I bemoan the lack of a powerful refactoring IDE like Java has in IntelliJ. A > good IDE is a massive productivity booster; you can only get so far with a > text editor*, no matter how many macros you have set up. Honestly.[..] Good editor support is definitely a productivity booster. However, the OP's point is something I agree with. Too many people come out these days whose experience in 'enterprise application development' is to click on a few "Next>" buttons on a wizard and then cut/paste some code. These people are slaves to their IDEs rather than efficient users of a tool. That is something which I don't really admire. -- ~noufal http://nibrahim.net.in ___ BangPypers mailing list BangPypers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/bangpypers
Re: [BangPypers] But IDEs rock! (was Google Go)
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:06 PM, Darkseid wrote: > >> 2. It's easy to hire an IDE-aware monkey to do programming in "proven >> technology" >> > I do most of my work in Ruby (and have done for a few years now). Every day > I bemoan the lack of a powerful refactoring IDE like Java has in IntelliJ. A > good IDE is a massive productivity booster; you can only get so far with a > text editor*, no matter how many macros you have set up. Honestly. > I think what Pradeep was stressing was the kind of coders who expect half the software to be created by the magic of IDEs. I know several VB developers who cannot write five lines of code all by themselves without the familiar IDE interface. They exist, they are all around you. I have a customer who is still implementing a project that was originally assigned to a very Big IT shop (one among the top 3 in the country) which was supposed to be completed in 2004. I see a battery of developers writing code every day sitting at the customers place. I had show the original SRS document to a senior project leader No one here is debating the benefits of IDE. Even I wish there was a better IDE for Python sometimes. ___ BangPypers mailing list BangPypers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/bangpypers
Re: [BangPypers] But IDEs rock! (was Google Go)
Yeah, that too :) Someday I will get of my ass and become a Emacs power user. Until then I'm muddling along with TextMate, snippets and a bunch of custom shell scripts. Of course http://martinfowler.com/bliki/IntentionalSoftware.html could become production ready first, in which case I may take longer :D Roshan Mathews wrote: On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:06 PM, Darkseid wrote: you can only get so far with a text editor*, no matter how many macros you have set up. Honestly. Macros?? Really??? Don't you mean "no matter how many scripts you have set up" :) ___ BangPypers mailing list BangPypers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/bangpypers ___ BangPypers mailing list BangPypers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/bangpypers
Re: [BangPypers] But IDEs rock! (was Google Go)
Yes, yes, I know, I know. While I'm no vi or emacs guru, I've paired (for a fair amount of time) with experienced VI and Emacs users. Snippets, Ctags etc. help a great deal - but have you ever worked with an AST aware development environment where you can safely make structural changes across your entire codebase? Try extracting an Interface from a Class and replace all references to the class with references to the interface across a 5000 class codebase by hand in a few seconds, without a single error afterward. How about add a parameter to a constructor, and have all references to said constructor changed? You can do all that and more with IntelliJ. The thing is, code should be like clay in the hands of a hacker; the fact that we have to deal with the AST via a text 'view' *really* slows us down. We often hesitate to make necessary changes because the manual effort involved in getting the refactoring done, and then testing it afterward for bugs is non-trivial. Even a simple 'Rename Class' refactoring can become a chore in a large codebase. The guys at Intentional and JetBrains are taking a serious shot at letting us mould the AST directly - but until their efforts reach maturity, IntelliJ is the closest we're going to get to it (and its going to be open source soon). I'm happy to demo it sometime, too. Don't diss it until you've tried it, preferably on a non toy project. Best, Sidu. Anand Balachandran Pillai wrote: On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:06 PM, Darkseid wrote: 2. It's easy to hire an IDE-aware monkey to do programming in "proven technology" I do most of my work in Ruby (and have done for a few years now). Every day I bemoan the lack of a powerful refactoring IDE like Java has in IntelliJ. A good IDE is a massive productivity booster; you can only get so far with a text editor*, no matter how many macros you have set up. Honestly. On E M A C S since 1998 and not doing very bad either... Best, Sidu. http://blog.sidu.in http://twitter.com/ponnappa * This is especially true of USD1800 text editors like Visual Studio. Pradeep Gowda wrote: That's what the big boys of the world wants you to believe. I had met a very senior official in the government a techy himself and spent 3 hours showing him virtues of Python and Django, hoping that they will change the RFP terms. I found out yesterday that the application has to be developed on a proven technology like Java,C++ or C#. When I spoke to the gentleman he said his consultant said that dynamically typed languages are not safe for mission critical work. The work is far from being mission-critical is another point altogether. That's because "big boys" define the market suitable to themselves. 1. it's easier to code more, take more time when using "proven technology" 2. It's easy to hire an IDE-aware monkey to do programming in "proven technology". Anyway, one answer to "proven technology" bugaboo is Jython and IronPython. It's still Java(platform) and .NET with bi-directional compatibility. +PG ___ BangPypers mailing list BangPypers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/bangpypers ___ BangPypers mailing list BangPypers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/bangpypers ___ BangPypers mailing list BangPypers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/bangpypers
Re: [BangPypers] But IDEs rock! (was Google Go)
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:06 PM, Darkseid wrote: > you can only get so far with a > text editor*, no matter how many macros you have set up. Honestly. > Macros?? Really??? Don't you mean "no matter how many scripts you have set up" :) ___ BangPypers mailing list BangPypers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/bangpypers
Re: [BangPypers] But IDEs rock! (was Google Go)
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 9:36 AM, Darkseid wrote: >> >> 2. It's easy to hire an IDE-aware monkey to do programming in "proven >> technology" > > I do most of my work in Ruby (and have done for a few years now). Every day > I bemoan the lack of a powerful refactoring IDE like Java has in IntelliJ. A > good IDE is a massive productivity booster; you can only get so far with a > text editor*, no matter how many macros you have set up. Honestly. My riff was on the "monkey" part, not on the IDE part. A programmer who uses IDEs for refactoring etc., is a more evolved primate, IMO ;) The bogus argument about "proven technologies" often stems from the belief that having a point-and-click-and-get-a-banana is a proof of maturity or "enterprise-readiness" . Platforms which are heavily IDE centric (eg: MS technologies) tend to encourage their developers to think inside the box (IDE) all the time. Even though most Java programmers do use Eclipse/Netbeans/IntelliJ it is not unheard of them to use vim/emacs more often than you hear a .NET developer using them. IDEs have their advantages. But more often than not, they also hide complexity behind all the boiler-code and templates. If programmers had to write XML by hand instead of having them spit-out by the IDE, we would have seen saner uses of XML in Java land, for instance. ___ BangPypers mailing list BangPypers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/bangpypers
Re: [BangPypers] But IDEs rock! (was Google Go)
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:06 PM, Darkseid wrote: > >> 2. It's easy to hire an IDE-aware monkey to do programming in "proven >> technology" >> > I do most of my work in Ruby (and have done for a few years now). Every day > I bemoan the lack of a powerful refactoring IDE like Java has in IntelliJ. A > good IDE is a massive productivity booster; you can only get so far with a > text editor*, no matter how many macros you have set up. Honestly. > On E M A C S since 1998 and not doing very bad either... > Best, > Sidu. > http://blog.sidu.in > http://twitter.com/ponnappa > > * This is especially true of USD1800 text editors like Visual Studio. > > Pradeep Gowda wrote: > >> That's what the big boys of the world wants you to believe. I had met a >>> very >>> senior official in the government a techy himself and spent 3 hours >>> showing >>> him virtues of Python and Django, hoping that they will change the RFP >>> terms. >>> >>> I found out yesterday that the application has to be developed on a >>> proven >>> technology like Java,C++ or C#. When I spoke to the gentleman he said his >>> consultant said that dynamically typed languages are not safe for mission >>> critical work. The work is far from being mission-critical is another >>> point >>> altogether. >>> >>> >> >> That's because "big boys" define the market suitable to themselves. >> >> 1. it's easier to code more, take more time when using "proven technology" >> 2. It's easy to hire an IDE-aware monkey to do programming in "proven >> technology". >> >> Anyway, one answer to "proven technology" bugaboo is Jython and >> IronPython. It's still Java(platform) and .NET >> with bi-directional compatibility. >> +PG >> ___ >> BangPypers mailing list >> BangPypers@python.org >> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/bangpypers >> >> >> > ___ > BangPypers mailing list > BangPypers@python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/bangpypers > -- --Anand ___ BangPypers mailing list BangPypers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/bangpypers
Re: [BangPypers] But IDEs rock! (was Google Go)
VS is no just-text editor. But hey, that's a flame war waiting to happen! On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:06 PM, Darkseid wrote: > >> 2. It's easy to hire an IDE-aware monkey to do programming in "proven >> technology" >> > I do most of my work in Ruby (and have done for a few years now). Every day > I bemoan the lack of a powerful refactoring IDE like Java has in IntelliJ. A > good IDE is a massive productivity booster; you can only get so far with a > text editor*, no matter how many macros you have set up. Honestly. > > Best, > Sidu. > http://blog.sidu.in > http://twitter.com/ponnappa > > * This is especially true of USD1800 text editors like Visual Studio. > > Pradeep Gowda wrote: > >> That's what the big boys of the world wants you to believe. I had met a >>> very >>> senior official in the government a techy himself and spent 3 hours >>> showing >>> him virtues of Python and Django, hoping that they will change the RFP >>> terms. >>> >>> I found out yesterday that the application has to be developed on a >>> proven >>> technology like Java,C++ or C#. When I spoke to the gentleman he said his >>> consultant said that dynamically typed languages are not safe for mission >>> critical work. The work is far from being mission-critical is another >>> point >>> altogether. >>> >>> >> >> That's because "big boys" define the market suitable to themselves. >> >> 1. it's easier to code more, take more time when using "proven technology" >> 2. It's easy to hire an IDE-aware monkey to do programming in "proven >> technology". >> >> Anyway, one answer to "proven technology" bugaboo is Jython and >> IronPython. It's still Java(platform) and .NET >> with bi-directional compatibility. >> +PG >> ___ >> BangPypers mailing list >> BangPypers@python.org >> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/bangpypers >> >> >> > ___ > BangPypers mailing list > BangPypers@python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/bangpypers > -- Yuvi Panda T http://yuvisense.net ___ BangPypers mailing list BangPypers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/bangpypers
[BangPypers] But IDEs rock! (was Google Go)
2. It's easy to hire an IDE-aware monkey to do programming in "proven technology" I do most of my work in Ruby (and have done for a few years now). Every day I bemoan the lack of a powerful refactoring IDE like Java has in IntelliJ. A good IDE is a massive productivity booster; you can only get so far with a text editor*, no matter how many macros you have set up. Honestly. Best, Sidu. http://blog.sidu.in http://twitter.com/ponnappa * This is especially true of USD1800 text editors like Visual Studio. Pradeep Gowda wrote: That's what the big boys of the world wants you to believe. I had met a very senior official in the government a techy himself and spent 3 hours showing him virtues of Python and Django, hoping that they will change the RFP terms. I found out yesterday that the application has to be developed on a proven technology like Java,C++ or C#. When I spoke to the gentleman he said his consultant said that dynamically typed languages are not safe for mission critical work. The work is far from being mission-critical is another point altogether. That's because "big boys" define the market suitable to themselves. 1. it's easier to code more, take more time when using "proven technology" 2. It's easy to hire an IDE-aware monkey to do programming in "proven technology". Anyway, one answer to "proven technology" bugaboo is Jython and IronPython. It's still Java(platform) and .NET with bi-directional compatibility. +PG ___ BangPypers mailing list BangPypers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/bangpypers ___ BangPypers mailing list BangPypers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/bangpypers
