From: James Britt <jamesUNDERBARb@...>
Date: 2005-01-29T12:51:27+09:00
Subject: Re: Ten Things Every Java Programmer Should Know About Ruby

Keith P. Boruff wrote:
> James Britt wrote:
>>Interesting.   Yet I get the feeling that such tools solve problems
>>largely brought on by the programming language in the first place, so
>>it's hard to see just what real gain such ease of use brings.
> 
> 
> Nope. A refactoring tool has nothing to do with solving the shortcomings of
> a programming language but rather the shortcomings of the programmer. Among
> many things, it's primarily a tool used to keep a software project from
> decaying. 

Ah.  Does it matter if a language is intrinsically amenable to constant 
refactoring, such that one rarely needs anything more than s// to 
refactor, as apposed to a language that may encourage the creation of 
complex, brittle code?

Shoes were created to solve the shortcomings of feet, but you're going 
to need them a lot more when you're walking on glass than when running 
on grass.

My point was that people who swear by some Java IDE because of the neat 
tools it offers rarely seem to consider that maybe if they weren't using 
Java them they wouldn't need the industrial-strength IDE.

Java  + [IntelliJ|Eclipse] < Ruby + [vim|emacs]



James