Comments on: Abstraction on your “Code View” http://almaer.com/blog/abstraction-on-your-code-view blogging about life, the universe, and everything tech Sat, 08 Sep 2012 07:06:53 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Jerome http://almaer.com/blog/abstraction-on-your-code-view/comment-page-1#comment-20406 Jerome Mon, 24 Oct 2005 16:17:41 +0000 http://almaer.com/blog2/abstraction-on-your-code-view#comment-20406 I don't quite agree, that the IDE (or a ghoul) should make things "pretty for me". Here is why: In some cases there is no ghoul or IDE available. I read a lot of books. Just when I need it most (when I try to learn something new), I also have to worry about strange looking code. The same applies for magazines. In other cases the wrong ghoul or IDE is at work, for example when I try to find a bug together with a colleague on his machine. That's why I really like the following idea: http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=74230 Specify where things have to go and you'll have the discussion only once (when the language is designed). I think it would be good for Groovy to allow only one style. Nobody would be serverely limited by either choice. I don’t quite agree, that the IDE (or a ghoul) should make things “pretty for me”.

Here is why:

In some cases there is no ghoul or IDE available. I read a lot of books. Just when I need it most (when I try to learn something new), I also have to worry about strange looking code. The same applies for magazines.

In other cases the wrong ghoul or IDE is at work, for example when I try to find a bug together with a colleague on his machine.

That’s why I really like the following idea:

http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=74230

Specify where things have to go and you’ll have the discussion only once (when the language is designed).

I think it would be good for Groovy to allow only one style. Nobody would be serverely limited by either choice.

]]>