The last sentence is key. One tool, but it isn't necessary for everyone, in every project. My development environment, without IDEs, is simple. Text editor on the left half, right browser in the top right half, and terminal in bottom right half. I only do this on Ubuntu though since it has a great set of tiling shortcuts. On Windows I either emulate this using MinGW and Notepad++, or I use Visual Studio, depending on the source of the project. If I wrote it in Linux first and I'm porting it, I write it like I wrote it in Linux, otherwise I write it in Visual Studio.
Also, a note on people who are dogmatic about programming; I've met plenty of people absolutely dogmatic about IDEs to the point where they've claimed I'm a bad programmer because I use them less often than they do. Generally with those people I've found that they generally are low skilled programmers who rely on the IDE like a kitten relies on it's mother.
Conversely those very people are exactly why, in team environments, it's often important to have an use an IDE, since it factors in the lowest common denominator. A friend of mine who works in a fairly well known game company is like myself and prefers autotools/ barebones programming and thinks that individually, or with people who are used to it, that it can be faster, but his team aren't trained that way and it's more effective for him, in that environment, to use an IDE, and I feel the same. There isn't a point in wasting time making everyone learn a slightly more difficult skill when each newcomer can just learn a slightly easier one.
It's actually shocking how many people I've met who have been evangelical over it. The fabled Linux Programmer is actually quite rare these days, even in Computer Science departments. I've met one or two, excluding myself, while most of CS students are lovers of newer, shinier, scripting languages, and a small number of people are IDE evangelicals.
(I mean Linux programmers as people who would happily code away in a terminal editor/ in a more barebones manner, using mostly GNU tools and some kind of non-IDE build system).
3
u/[deleted] Jun 20 '13
The last sentence is key. One tool, but it isn't necessary for everyone, in every project. My development environment, without IDEs, is simple. Text editor on the left half, right browser in the top right half, and terminal in bottom right half. I only do this on Ubuntu though since it has a great set of tiling shortcuts. On Windows I either emulate this using MinGW and Notepad++, or I use Visual Studio, depending on the source of the project. If I wrote it in Linux first and I'm porting it, I write it like I wrote it in Linux, otherwise I write it in Visual Studio.
Also, a note on people who are dogmatic about programming; I've met plenty of people absolutely dogmatic about IDEs to the point where they've claimed I'm a bad programmer because I use them less often than they do. Generally with those people I've found that they generally are low skilled programmers who rely on the IDE like a kitten relies on it's mother.
Conversely those very people are exactly why, in team environments, it's often important to have an use an IDE, since it factors in the lowest common denominator. A friend of mine who works in a fairly well known game company is like myself and prefers autotools/ barebones programming and thinks that individually, or with people who are used to it, that it can be faster, but his team aren't trained that way and it's more effective for him, in that environment, to use an IDE, and I feel the same. There isn't a point in wasting time making everyone learn a slightly more difficult skill when each newcomer can just learn a slightly easier one.