[erlang-questions] "Erlang as a First Language" -- crazy? or just stupid?

Toby Thain toby@REDACTED
Mon Dec 28 05:54:49 CET 2009

On 27-Dec-09, at 6:22 PM, egarrulo wrote:

> 2009/12/25 Robert Virding <rvirding@REDACTED>
>> But I do think that refusing to learn and use a language because  
>> it doesn't
>> have an IDE is rather stupid, it is not really that difficult to  
>> do it
>> yourself.
> *It is* if you are a newbie both at programming and at using  
> related tools.
> Unlike some people who call an IDE any editor with syntax- 
> highlighting which
> allows you to run a compiler, I call an IDE at least an editor with
> syntax-highlighting which allows you to run a compiler *and* single  
> step and
> debug your programs at source level.
>> Also I tend to be skeptical of "intelligent" systems that try to  
>> help me. I
>> often find that if such systems don't get it really right they are  
>> usually a
>> hindrance as you then have to work around them. I have nothing  
>> against
>> getting help but I prefer its workings to be transparent so you can
>> understand what it does and can use it efficiently.
> I do agree wholeheartedly (that's why I cannot stand Eclipse).  
> Let's just
> not forget we all started bicycling with training wheels, and  
> crawled before
> walking (again, that's why I've suggested Emacs as IDE).

Then we all now seem to be in agreement that source level debuggers,  
IDEs, fancy editors or even a computer are entirely optional as  
learning aids.


More information about the erlang-questions mailing list