Search posts, tags, users, and pages
Isn't this a bit like saying you should write assembly before relying on a compiler to do it for you?
I don't see the link but thank's for giving your opinion
Younes Afkari because it's about automation / abstraction. You make the point that people who rely heavily on their IDE don't actually know how to operate on the enviroment / write the language.
I happen to agree with you, also there is a chapter in 97 things every developer should know where this is pointed out as well.
Still the point is abstraction and perspective also the metrics are quite different and the question of language vs concept proficiency. Also a similar conclusion can be drawn between imperative and declarative languages.
Should the developer be concern himself with the problem or the language he has to express it in? I think this is a rather extreme example from Mark and maybe I read to much in it. But I like the position, at least to me it's a valid counter argument if we move the values from concretization VS abstraction.
What is the value / perspective we use and why does it makes sense from that angle? :) Just thinking out loud here :)
I think we have to find the right balance and not fall into the trap of being too dependent on the tool.
Thank's for your comment ^^
Mark j I found this too misleading. So I've written a post. Please check it: hashnode.com/post/how-ide-is-a-blessing-for-begin…
The point is that every convenient tools that does stuff for you - like a compiler or IDE or framework - makes you learn less about the layer below, because you need it less.
But that doesn't automatically mean you should learn the lower layers. Compilers took care of assembly so now most of us don't need to learn it anymore. High level languages took care of GC so now most of us don't need manual memory management anymore. IDEs write public static void main(String[] args) for us so why memorize it?
At the extreme, learning all the lower layers means learning electrodynamics, because all we're really doing is pushing electrons around metal circuits. We can all agree that is ridiculous (I hope), so where's the cutoff? When can you stop learning lower levels?
So to summarize: yes, if you learn with an IDE, you don't learn to do manually what the IDE does for you. But why would you?