![]() ![]() In some respects, tools can also improve implementation quality, by performing tasks for the programmer that would be more error prone if done manually - e.g. ![]() The benefits of a broader selection of languages are more qualitative being able to choose an appropriate language can allow a programmer to come up with a better design and better implementation. The benefits of the kinds of tools referred to in the article (IDEs and RAD tools) are mostly quantitative the tool can offload some of the work from the programmer. The article, apparently trying to avoid being provocative, fails to draw one obvious conclusion from the observations presented - if language mavens are able to use more languages, they have more freedom of choice, and are more likely to be able to choose the language that's "the right tool for the job". I'll try to be provocative in case it might actually tempt someone to try to defend the "tool maven" perspective on LtU. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |