<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote> > 1) Intellisense is really just another crutch that does more harm than > good? There were a few hardcore defenders of this position but not > many. I'm primarily a VB programmer, but I also do Java and web stuff as well. Whenever I look at a new IDE the FIRST thing I look at is whether Intellisense-like functionality is present. If it is not, I discard it from further consideration. The reason has nothing to do with static vs dynamic typing. It has to do with the fact that I spend a considerably amount of time thinking about how I'm going to solve the problem at hand. Filling my head with API specs that I have to look up is just a pain. And frankly if I have to type 'boolean' instead of 'boo<tab>' I get real cranky real fast.
> 2) Intellisense is really useful but hard to implement well in IDEs for > dynamic languages? Can anyone comment on the status of > Intellisense-like tools for dynamic-language IDEs? It might be and probably is. But I say if dynamic typers want the flexibility they think they are getting then they should have to deal with ALL of the consequences. > 3) Users of dynamic languages are always developing/debugging running > programs where the current type of a variable is known and hence > Intellisense is possible again? My own limited experience with dynamic > languages (Ruby) is limited to edit-run cycles. I can't speak to that only to say that, how in the world can an object that accepts anything reasonable be expected to protect itself from misuse or provide reliable services given a set of parameters? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
