Re: Do you suggest me using IDE when I'm learning JAVA

From:

Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li>

Newsgroups:

comp.lang.java.programmer

Date:

Wed, 5 May 2010 00:44:16 +0100

Message-ID:

<alpine.DEB.1.10.1005050042070.3711@urchin.earth.li>

On Tue, 4 May 2010, Jim Janney wrote:

"BGB / cr88192" <cr88192@hotmail.com> writes:

"Arne Vajh?j" <arne@vajhoej.dk> wrote in message
news:4bdf80e8$0$285$14726298@news.sunsite.dk...

On 02-05-2010 22:49, Jim Janney wrote:

Which leads me to speculate that for reasonably dynamic languages
(Java and Lisp and C# but not C or C++) the best IDE is one written
in the target language. For example, I really expect any Java IDE to
take advantage of the reflection API, and that's easiest done from
Java (or at least some JVM-based language).

I think that is more about eating ones own dog food paradigm.

The technical problems of doing IDE for language A in language B are
solvable.

the technical differences between languages should be relatively
trivial WRT writing an IDE. pretty much any sufficiently capable
language should be able to write an IDE for pretty much any other
sufficiently capable language.

This is where the bit about "for reasonably dynamic languages" comes
into play. A Lisp program can easily modify itself at runtime, using
the mechanisms of the language in a very natural way; this makes it an
obvious choice for writing a Lisp IDE.

The word you're looking for is 'homoiconic' - meaning that running
programs are represented by the same means as the data manipulated by
those programs.

I'm not sure, now that I think about it, whether Java fits into this
category or not.

It doesn't.

You can load new classes at runtime; you can even assemble byte code in
memory and then load it as a class, but it's not what I'd consider a
natural part of the language. And languages like C and Fortran don't
even have a foot in the door.

C doesn't? You never heard of void*?

tom

--
My goal wasn't to make a ton of money. It was to build good computers. --
Woz