I do think he has a point. If your "...codebase is so complex that you need a large IDE to comprehend it." Then you're doing something wrong. Use an IDE because you want to, not because it's impossible to survive your mess without it.
I think the point that I was trying to make is that we use techonology to allow us to do things we couldn't do without it. Once a given technology is embraced it's usually "impossible to survive your mess without it". Try to fly w/o your airplane. To punctuate the point consider that modern fighter airplanes can't even stay in the air w/o a computer, people can't react that quickly.
In the case of computer code base and development tools it's all pretty arbitrary where you draw your line in the sand and I don't think it really matters how "deep your dependency stack is" as long as it works properly, and what you happen to be using either helps you or gets in your way. I'm sure that many "good" codebases could not be maintained w/o the proper tools. Maintain your perl codebase with punchcards.
As long as your technology/toolset is helping and not hurting you who cares what it is. To utilize any sort of technology takes a certain skill set, infrastructure and box of tools. Preaching vi vs IDE, or biclycle vs airplane, or wood fire vs hydroelectric plant, or earth is flat vs earth is round, or black vs white or whatever..is only clinging to the familiar and trying to avoid change and is ultimately self limiting, lets face it vi is technology from the 60's lol. Just because it is still useful doesn't mean it's the right tool for everything. If you don't get what I mean me just try to fly your bicycle from New Mexico to hawaii and let me know how it goes. Sorry if my spelling is bad but my spell checker isn't working and I'm not willing to get out my Dictionary....
/me shakes his fist at XML Spy addicts Ponder, j _______________________________________________ Omaha-pm mailing list Omaha-pm@pm.orghttp://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/omaha-pm