How do *REAL* programmers work?

[Ted Roche]

Sorry, I misspoke. I'm a writer of books, magazine articles and essays as
well as a programmer. Going from a text-based word processor, like
WordPerfect 4.1, to a GUI word processor, like MS Write or Word, was a great
step backwards, as the graphical appearance - fonts, bold, point size,
margins - became of more concern than finishing a good thought. Much too
distracting, imo.

I agree with you that going from the line-based editors to the full-screen
editors was a great leap forward.

-----Original Message-----
From: gnhlug-discuss-admin at mail.gnhlug.org
[mailto:gnhlug-discuss-admin at mail.gnhlug.org] On Behalf Of bmcculley at rcn.com
Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2004 7:57 PM
To: tedroche at tedroche.com
Cc: gnhlug-discuss at mail.gnhlug.org
Subject: RE: How do *REAL* programmers work?


Ted Roche <tedroche at tedroche.com> wrote:

>I know my writing suffered as I went from text editors 
>to word processing, and I suspect there are analogues in 
>programming. On the other hand, sometimes that picture 
>really is worth a thousand words. I hope there's a happy
>medium.

Hmm.  I felt that going from the typewriter model text editors
to the screen-oriented word processors was a quantum
improvement, because it facilitated verbal composition with
attention to structure as well as expression.  I felt some of
the same orders of magnitude improvement from going into a
decent IDE for the first time, because linking debugging and
source editor windows and multiple module views was so
powerful.  It freed me from the mechanical issues of different
tools and allowed me to focus on the logical constructs I was
using the toolset to build.

just an observation from a different point of view.

-Bruce McCulley
_______________________________________________
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss at mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss