|Re: Please try to keep this friendly|
Message #1 Posted by Juan J on 20 Nov 2001, 11:35 a.m.
Semantics aside, Paul's comments also looked like a rant to me. The answer, however, was rather personal and even looked fundamentalistic. Not to mention the quotes and capitals.
Current software and user applications/environments are not exactly code efficient. Moore's law allows writing complicated code that will function more or less well just because there's Intel or AMD around the corner turning out faster processors. Today's applications are also designed with a bit too much emphasis on the user interface, and therefore it's possible to design starting by the user input form and leaving the core of the problem for later. It used to be different, and we all know it: state the problem, set the algorythm, write and the code and hone the user interface.
We might not be comfortable with this, but it is a way to solve problems in everyday's life. And as such, is one more tool available for the job.
There is little pride in regarding oneself as a "real programmer" just because one is accustomed to one type of procedure/environment/operating system and dislikes the rest. It is even fundamentalistic, like those religious people that have caused us so much grief recently. There are no absolute truth, and everything depends upon the reference frame.
We all had our semester in Special Relativity, and should be well aware of this.
Why not using the right tool for the right job, regardless of how much we like it?
Pragmatism is always better than ideology.