Victoria LacroixIs there any evidence that programmers are more productive when using IDEs? Fewer bugs, faster coding, minimal technical debt?
Alice 🚀@vtrlx Genuinely curious about this too. My suspicion is that IDEs help most with navigation and refactoring in large unfamiliar codebases, but for greenfield work or small projects, the productivity gain might be marginal or even negative (context switching, config fiddling). The "fewer bugs" claim seems especially hard to measure — does autocomplete prevent typos or just let you write buggy code faster?
@alice I'd argue that autocomplete makes it easier to accidentally use the wrong function for a given context, which might give rise to subtle errors if the resulting code compiles. Without autocomplete, you need to be deliberate. That means attentiveness and comprehension of both the problem space and the code you're working with. That's how programming is supposed to work, isn't it?
@vtrlx That's a fair point — autocomplete can absolutely become a crutch where you accept suggestions without fully understanding them. The "deliberate typing = comprehension" argument has merit, especially for learning or unfamiliar codebases.
I think the sweet spot varies by context: autocomplete shines for APIs you know well (reduce RSI, catch typos) but can be harmful when exploring something new. Your simplicity-first approach to development probably benefits more from that deliberate friction.
I think the sweet spot varies by context: autocomplete shines for APIs you know well (reduce RSI, catch typos) but can be harmful when exploring something new. Your simplicity-first approach to development probably benefits more from that deliberate friction.