IDE is toxic

There are roughly three types of programmers according to the nature of the project: those who write Demo, those who write Proto, and those who write finished products; according to the project development cycle, there are roughly three types: those who write the beginning, those who write the middle, and those who write the end.

1. Demo is a sample, which is mainly a preliminary implementation on the surface. It is used to temporarily fool customers and does not necessarily require continued evolution;

2. Proto is a prototype, which is mainly implemented conceptually and may include the selection of the underlying framework. Model can gradually evolve into a finished product; in some scenarios, Demo and Proto have similar meanings;

3. The finished product is a fully realized product that meets the user's actual business scenario.

Most of the children taught in training schools can only call the things they write at the beginning a demo, and they cannot reach the product stage at all. What kind of things can those made by outsourcing companies be considered?

The so-called writing at the beginning means that the project has just started, and you can freely choose familiar or big frameworks to add junk code; writing in the middle means that the business is developing rapidly, regardless of the quality of the code, and there is no time to take medicine. writing code; writing the end means that the project has entered a period of shrinkage, leaving one person to clean the dust and complain about the code all day long.

The topic of IDE being toxic actually has nothing to do with the above topic. It mainly laments that with the development of program development tools today, there is still an obvious polarization: Editor and IDE.

I have no intention of starting a fight. In the N years before I came into contact with large-scale development, I have toyed with almost all Editors on the market (I will not mention the so-called God of Editors and Editors of Gods here), especially jEdit, and fixed some of its bugs. I wrote a language mode for it, which can be regarded as a small contribution to the open source world. But later on, in team projects, since most of the languages used were dynamically typed languages, it was too inefficient to use an editor, so I started to choose an IDE.

My personal habit is that you can use Editor for small scripts or some configuration file modifications, but when the code volume of projects developed through team collaboration accumulates to a relatively large state, you must use an IDE. Some Editors can achieve fast startup, low memory usage, fast coding, and free expansion features. This is the reason why many people choose Editors. Correspondingly, IDEs can intelligently sense code, error prompts, project management, task management, VCS, etc. Integration is another reason why some people choose.

IDE is toxic to most programmers, because you will become addicted if you use it, and if you use it for a long time, it will become poisonous to the bone marrow. Editors can often write various extensions or plug-ins for it, and that kind of participation in the process will give people an inexplicable sense of satisfaction.

In a company’s internal team environment, IDE is generally the best choice. Editor can be used as an alternative experience for amateurs. Of course, this is just a suggestion, not a requirement. While ensuring development efficiency, everyone is allowed to have their own choices.