>>55
Your well written retort, especially on
/prog/, is welcome and appreciated.
You're mischaracterizing the content of that article.
I may be mischaracterizing the point of the article, but hardly the content. He shouldn't have rambled on about various other half-meditated complaints and got to the point.
He's talking about programming tools that lead programmers to work in a particular fashion rather than in a way that is optimal for humans or will result in quality programs.
You could say that about the keyboard you use, the number of monitors you have, or the chair you sit in. A good programmer should already have constructed much of the code design using established patterns and concepts well before even sitting down with a computer. If you're really affected that much by a dumb IDE, you've got bigger problems.
Is it so hard to believe that he does, overall, enjoy his job, even though he feels that in some ways it could be better?
Indeed, without discussing problems things won't improve. So maybe if he discussed the elitist stick up his ass he might get better.