> people who shouldn't be talking about CS.
Dijkstra said computer science is about computers as much as astronomy is about telescopes.
I am not sure I agree with that, but it's definitely not about text editor choice.
I have a .vimrc file with LSPs and whatnot. But it was from 3 years back. These days I use VSCode and IntelliJ (depending on language) because they do so many things out of the box. I would say the choice of editor is the least consequential thing in one's understanding of "CS" and programming methodologies. On the other hand, using debuggers, profilers, monitoring tooling can have a real impact on how you solve some problems.
> I am not sure I agree with that, but it's definitely not about text editor choice.
It's definitely possible but I genuinely don't understand how people work for decades and still move their hand all the way to the arrow keys just go move the cursor to another word. Especially when the solution for this inefficiency is so accessible, existed for decades and is widely available in almost every tool. It's something that goes against the spirit of the medium which is all about automation.
It’s not the bottleneck of true productivity. It doesn’t matter any more than how close the pedals are together would affect how long it takes me to drive somewhere.
I disagree, the older I get the more aware I am of how impactful even minor friction is. Having "pedals closer together" does in fact make you press the pedals more often especially when you do that thousands of times per day.
> These days I use VSCode and IntelliJ (depending on language) because they do so many things out of the box.
While I don't appreciate the weight of an IDE, the time commitment to create (and maintain!) a config for vim/nvim with LSP, agents, etc., loses out to the relative ease of adding vim-style modal editing to the IDE.
>Dijkstra said computer science is about computers as much as astronomy is about telescopes.
He said many stupid things when it was outside of his domain of mathematics and algorithms.