Comments on: Refactoring IDEs and Dynamic Languages http://blog.codeeg.com/2006/10/01/refactoring-ides-and-dynamic-languages/ Thu, 29 Jul 2010 00:53:45 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Martin http://blog.codeeg.com/2006/10/01/refactoring-ides-and-dynamic-languages/comment-page-1/#comment-509 Martin Mon, 02 Oct 2006 05:40:34 +0000 http://blog.codeeg.com/2006/10/01/refactoring-ides-and-dynamic-languages/#comment-509 And still great projects evolve using dynamic typed languages. Of course the support of an IDE is absolutely necessary (and I still miss the good old Java features in Radrails) but still, it is a different concept. Especially in Ruby, the intention must be seen in the code and not from a type hierarchy. If you ever had a look at Eclipse Plug-in development then, you will notiice that the availability of interfaces, abstract classes and types makes people crazy. They will introduce new stuff every five minutes and in the end they call it a new programming paradigm. But one important thing left from my point of view: Good code does not derive from a good IDE. And still great projects evolve using dynamic typed languages. Of course the support of an IDE is absolutely necessary (and I still miss the good old Java features in Radrails) but still, it is a different concept. Especially in Ruby, the intention must be seen in the code and not from a type hierarchy.

If you ever had a look at Eclipse Plug-in development then, you will notiice that the availability of interfaces, abstract classes and types makes people crazy. They will introduce new stuff every five minutes and in the end they call it a new programming paradigm.

But one important thing left from my point of view: Good code does not derive from a good IDE.

]]>