Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Regarding misspelled identifiers, I've experienced the exact opposite problem. Code I had to work with that was clearly written in simple editors often contained misspelled words (though it was also usually written by non-native English speakers) and even bugs arising from using a wrong variable name. Errors that with proper tooling would be near impossible to make, because the tool would immediately underline the variable as either containing a spelling error or not being defined. Not to mention it also lead people to using generic non-descriptive variable names and abbreviations.

I also watched some people trying to printf-debug a problem, and it's usually a fest of "Was the problem here? Hm, not here, ok, let's put these statements over there. Hm, not over there either, what about here... (repeat several more times, depending on how deep the calls go)" Having to do something like this would really feel like stone age to me, when you could just get all the relevant information in one quick pass without having to modify any code.

Another thing is documentation. When you know that you can just bring up a method's documentation with a single keystroke, you are much more motivated to document your own methods in the same way. If it's just "some generator will create a bunch of static html pages later on that most people likely won't ever read", some people will not bother.

I do agree about flaws in tools being a huge issue though. Especially with refactoring tools, if you can't trust it to not accidentally mess up parts of your code, you might as well not use it at all. Similarly, if you can't trust a "find usages of this method" to find ALL of its usages, the utility diminishes severely.

EDIT: oh, and perhaps the most simple, but most important feature of all, being able to Ctrl+click a function to navigate to its definition means that people are going to dive into the code a lot more often, even framework/library code, which is obviously beneficial to learning how things work under the hood. The less friction there is to doing something, the more readily people are going to do it.



Why my request for a TL;DR got downvoted? I thought, if you had that much to say, it could be am interesting opinion, but I didn't have enough time to go through it all.


I didn't downvote, but I read a TL;DR, especially one directed at the commenter, as saying "my time is more important than yours; could you spend your time purely for my benefit, despite my not being willing to put in my time to read what you've said?" All else aside, it probably takes longer to ask for, and then complain about downvotes on, the request than it does to read 4 short paragraphs.


Since when TL;DR's have an obligatory hidden meaning? You can speculate on that, but it's. just your speculation and nothing more and it can be at the compete opposite side of my intentions. So don't tell me what you read in my two words "TL;DR".

There is no way I should justify a request for summary in the first place I just did that afterwards in order to undetstand reasons for downvoting and if that was that someone else is giving their own interpretation to my request, then it's not a valid reason for me.

Their downvote does not make me learn anything new and I just observe how obtuse and flawed their mental process was. They were probably angry for having to read all the long comment I referred to and for not accepting someone else could get away with a shorter version of it. It's called envy and it sucks.

TL;DR:

I don't give a shit about your downvotes if you give your own interpretation to my request in order to support your envy for the fact that I could get away with a shorter version of the original text.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: