You should not need a Gargantuan cycle-hogging "IDE" to paper over
mistakes in a design. Have you studied Meyer's LACE at all?
Now hold on a second :)
Firstly, unless you are running X on a PDP-11/44 or NT on a 286, an IDE like Eclipse is not that much of a big deal. These days there are plenty of spare cycles and memory addresses to hog on a modern development workstation.
Secondly, although I agree that ideally one should not need an IDE to compensate for design errors in a programming language, IDEs are peerless when it comes to supporting computer-aided processes like refactoring. Machines are far better at cross-checking fiddly things like inter- and intra-module references than are humans. And besides, I know of no significant (i.e. those I have heard of ;) programming languages that lack design errors. Although I must admit, I probably only know of a fraction of the scores or hundreds that you know about.
As an aside, I think it would be rather indelicate to study Meyer's LACE, even if Meyer wasn't wearing it.
Regards,
Edwin Fine
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
erlang-questions@...
http://www.erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
