I've noticed that most of my professors don't use syntax hilighting in VIM. They will either use white on black, or green on black. Does /prog/ think that this makes them worse programmers?
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-23 13:48
Better. Syntax highlighting is for people who can't read code.
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-23 13:49
No. Syntax highlighting is almost completely useless (actually more on the `harmful' side) apart from comments and string literals.
Anyone using green on black that haven't used an old green phosphor terminal is a fucking poser.
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-23 13:56
>>5
I'm quite positive that all his professors have. You have to be a serious newfag to not have used one.
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-23 14:25
I USE GREEN ON BLACK BECAUSE I HAVE SEEN THE MATRIX AND IT MAKES ME FEEL LIKE TRINITY. OH GOD I WISH IS WAS TRINITY
Trinity also likes nmap and she is kawaii. And there are hackers in the movie and that's good because I like hacksaws and I will never have mad skills. Why am I such a loser?
Trinity is like my dreamgirl she has a LaTeX suit I love that. She is also nice why aren't real girls nice!? I got winnuked a lot of times but I love Trinity and she wouldn't packet me because she's so nice and cool.
We would hack the Matrix all day and watch glyph codes and other cool animations on the HUD, and I would have sex with her because sex is so good. I wish I could have sex with a girl.
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-23 14:39
>>6
I guess they might. I just had a knee-jerk reaction because I'm so fucking sick of kids shooting readibility to hell with blocky fonts and green-on-black because they think it looks cool or whatever the hell retarded reason they have. At least if they'd grown used to it during years of having nothing better available, they'd have an excuse.
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-23 14:40
>>5
One of my local libraries still uses phosphor terminals. They're not extinct yet, so I'd expect pretty much everyone has used or at least seen one at some point.
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-23 14:46
>>1
If they don't use syntax highlighting (not hilighting as you said in your post) then they are obviously not programmers.
Sure, Sussman wrote on the fucking blackboard using one marker, not fucking 100 colors.
So your professors are not programmers but might be computer scientists.
They are also not vimmers, since that is one of the most basic features.
I don't use syntax highlighting, just basic white-on-black. To me, it's as annoying as inline spellchecking/autocorrection. I just want to see what I typed, nothing more and nothing less.
Also, I've noticed that most of the guys that teach C/C++ and systems programming use light foreground, dark background while the Java/Python/etc. use light background, dark foreground.
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-23 20:45
Syntax highlighting make you reliant on the computer instead of your skill. It's just as bad as debuggers that make you lazy.
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-23 20:50
That's no reason not to use it at all.
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-23 20:59
Is that why EXPERT PROGRAMMERAnselm R. Garbe doesn't use syntax highlighting?
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-23 21:13
>>15
So by the dame logic there's no reason to ever remove the training wheels on a bike, right?
>>17
training wheels fuck up your turning ratio, syntax highlighting doesn't change anything for bad, I use it 'cause OMG NICE COLORS and because I'm using a 15" CRT and I have a pretty bad view, so I can see spaces better at a glance, and because, yes, for me code gets clearer.
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-23 21:27
syntax highlighting doesn't change anything for bad
It shifts away the responsibility for correct syntax from you to the computer.
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-23 21:28
Syntax highlighting make you reliant on the computer instead of your skill. [citation needed]
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-23 22:36
Well sorry you elitist fucks, some of us can't see as well as we'd like to be able to and therefore
a.) use dark backgrounds to not nuke our eyes
b.) use syntax highlighting to avoid typos.
ITT kids who couldn't program without serious hand-holding.
You remind of the sort of people who keep a language reference on their desk.
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-23 23:51
ITT people who are resentful because others have found useful tools to be more productive.
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-24 0:03
ITT lispers who keep their CLtL on their desk as a reference manual
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-24 0:08
>>28
You aren't more productive when you allow yourself to make more mistakes
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-24 0:13
>>30
So your entire opinion is based on the fact that you think syntax highlighting is only for detecting mistakes?
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-24 0:16
>>31
It can also help beginners do things like differentiating functions from variables.
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-24 0:28
>>32
Well, you've sure convinced me of the dangers of syntax highlighting!
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-24 0:31
good syntax highlighting can help reduce a programmer's mental burden allowing the programmer to concentrate more mental energy into writing and refactoring programs instead of fucking around with syntax
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-24 1:36
I've noticed that most of my professors don't use syntax hilighting in VIM VIM
Stopped reading there.
I'm not OP's professor, but I sometimes use syntax highlighting because it's pretty. I don't actually know what the colors mean though.
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-24 4:01
I use syntax highlighting because it looks nice and I like it. I'm pretty sure it helps me scan through code faster. Sometimes I switch emacs color themes according to my mood, just to be a fag.
Not using syntax highlighting is fine too. There is really no reason to care about this issue. Read your SICP.
I knew /prog/ was full of fags but didn't expect so many morons actually.
God damn reddit.
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-24 11:09
I have a morning ritual that I need to share. I call it 'the sussman'. First I crouch down in the shower in the classic 'I put on my robe and wizard hat' pose. With my eyes closed I crouch there for a minute, visualizing either Sussman or Abelson and I start to hum the SICP theme. Then I slowly rise to a standing position and open my eyes. It helps me to proceed through my day as an emotionless EXPERT PROGRAMMER. The only problem is if the shower curtain sticks to my sussman leg. It ruins the fantasy.
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-24 18:13
Excessive syntax highlighting is distracting. All you need is bold for builtins/keywords, something to identify strings, and paren-flashing.
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-24 18:49
>>41 Excessive syntax highlighting is distracting. All you need is.
Fixed it for you.
Expert programmers write all their code on the back of napkins, like Leonardo da Vinci did.
If they have to read someone else's code, they first print it out on an old matrix printer. They use colored paper to group sections of the program, and highlight important parts and errors with a marker.
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-24 22:21
>>14
With all the time people spend programming on rocks, I'd hate to be reliant on a computer.
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-24 22:41
Hi, OP's professor here. I don't use syntax highlighting cause I'm not a faggot.
>>48
FUCK! I've been coding on the FRONT of napkins!
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-25 1:09
Interesting topic...
Have you ever heard someone complain that they can't read Lisp? I don't mean because of the parentheses, but because it's very regular. You have to rely on context to interpret the meaning of the code. The visual aspects don't immediately reveal to the reader what it all means.
Take the simple example of Visual Basic. What does foo mean? Is it a procedure/function call, or a variable, or what? There's no visual clue. Compare this to C's foo vs. foo().
In Lisp, pretty much the only visual clues you have are (foo) is "call the procedure/macro foo" and foo is "the variable foo".
At first I thought these complainers were just stupid because they couldn't read Lisp. But after some thought, I realized that some people just really find it difficult reading contextual language, and maybe it was a valid complaint.
Other visual clues are more helpful for the meaning of blocks of code for viewing at a distance, or quickly. The prime example, of course, indentation. In Lisp, good indentation is very important for reading. And pretty much in most languages, if you want your code to be seen rather than deciphered.
This brings me to colors (or bolds/highlight/etc). Personally, I prefer very few colors in my code. I'll permit dark grays. I find highlighting quite distracting sometimes. But I do believe that for some people, colors have use like indentation. Colors can be used to make people write correct code, and colors can help people read code better. Take the example of parenthesis matching. For a Lisper, it is very useful. For other programmers, even, it is still useful.
Finally I would like to say that someone supposed that being reliant on the computer is bad. I disagree. Let me preface by saying that by "reliant", I mean using the computer to be helpful with our mistakes, not that we can only write code with a computer and otherwise we are helpless. We let the computer do things that are a waste of time for us. If I look at another person's piece of code, is it immediately obvious to me that there is an unterminated string constant? If I have syntax highlighting, it sure is. Why should I have to scan through it myself just to validate the syntax? People write programs with compilers, references, editors, an internet connection and Led Zeppelin. Wanting a computer for syntax highlighting isn't an issue. It's there because people make mistakes; it's part of being human. This is why compilers do syntax checking. I don't presume your argument is also that a compiler shouldn't do syntax checking because the human can do that?
This is a long post, but the subject interests me.
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-25 1:16
>>53
Actually I suppose the compiler has to do syntax checking in order to generate the AST. But the compiler also tells you about it and gives you information. If the human always gets it right, generating this information would be useless. But humans are stupid.
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-25 4:42
>>48
JAYKAY ROLLING WROTE ``HARRY POTTER'' ON NAPKINS.
>>53
I tried to write a lengthy reply to this twice. I think the ability to read code with obsessive precision is vital to being a programmer. Syntax highlighting, like spell-check highlighting, will make you dumber.
>>61
read some kernel code without syntax highlighting.
After 50 lines or so you'll be lost.
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-25 19:00
>>62
That's the whole point.
Stay the fuck away from the kernel btw.
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-25 19:21
>>62
How could I possibly make sense of "the kernel" after reading only 50 lines of it? And if syntax highlighting has any bearing on your ability to understand code, stay the fuck away from all code, ever.
This thread reminds me of when I was forced to use Eclipse and Java in a course.
I don't know about the others, but when I'm in the middle of typing and some of the text changes color or something gets highlighted then de-highlighted, it's distracting. And the automated syntax checking is even worse - "You have an undeclared variable here." "Missing parenthesis." "Uninitialized variable." I'm perfectly aware of that and I'll fix it later, but right now the code I happen to be working on is more important. SHUT THE FUCK UP, MACHINE.
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-26 2:54
>>66
I used Eclipse just recently, and my reaction was the same almost word-for-word. The rage was palpable.
Luckily I was just trying it out for curiosity's sake on a lab machine, so I had the luxury of closing it in disgust.
>>77
You should learn about syntax highlighting while you're still in college. It will save you some embarrassment later. Nobody seems to have told you yet, but you won't get to keep using lisp once you graduate.
>>100 /prog/ is /b/. The difference grows smaller every day.
Name:
Anonymous2009-03-06 8:09
post a message here I automatically get banned from 4chan for a week writing bullshit programs with borland sepples builder 6 Your nationality USA 7 Your favorite programming language Scheme 8 The first programming language you used 9 Your opinion on the FORCED GLOBAL NAMESPACE THREAD.