Do you think VS and Intellisense make us dumber?

Question

I read this article, the parts of "Intellisense" and "Generated Code":

http://www.charlespetzold.com/etc/DoesVisualStudioRotTheMind.html

Do you think the Author's is right?

I don't agree that Intellisense is soooo bad for programmers. VS for C# uses to "hide" the controls' events in another file, but you can find them if you know enough about the language and you can modify them by hand. And with VS I don't need to memorize all the .Net classes I use. I think it doesn't matter if you use an IDE or notepad but, if thsese RAD tools exist and are free... Why not to use them?

Answer 1

It doesn't make smart people dumber, but it makes dumb people look smarter

Answer 2

No, modern programming tools and languages help the programmer focus less on the little things and more on the big picture.

The main goal is to design solid software. If a programmer doesn't have to worry about memorizing every method of a class, they can spend more time on engineering the product.

Answer 3

Our physics prof always said why memorize something you can look up. He always listed the required formulas on the board during exams. Seems to be intellisense is the same idea. Rather than remembering if the object uses a Count or a Length property, let VS tell me.

Answer 4

No, it enables us to code faster I think. Anything to make the coding process faster, easier and simpler is a step in the right direction in my opinion.

Answer 5

I use intellisense and generated code to speed up development, not because I don't know what I'm doing. Therefore, I can't agree that using them makes you dumber.

I am the kind of person that will try to learn as much about a language as possible before attempting to use the tools that facilitate development in that language. In that regard, I have to agree with Matthew Jones' comment that "tools do not make people dumber...laziness and lack of drive do."

Answer 6

No I very much disagree with this point.

Yes, I do agree that intellisense allows me to keep less of an objects growing number of members in my head. I am dumber in the sense that I often know less about the intricate details of projects where I use intellisense heavily.

For instance, I can probably rattle off all of the members of the C++ types I use with great accuracy. I tend to be a VIM only guy for my C++ projects and hence don't really use intellisnsee. In C# and VB.Net projects though I couldn't rattle off the members with the same accuracy as I rely on intellisense more often.

But there is a trade off. Keeping all of the members in my head comes with a cost. When writing code, instead of focusing on the algorithm, I focus on the members. I have to constantly think about the naming convention of a particular type, or the parameter list, what's byref or by val, when writing out an algorithm in C++. In C#/VB.Net I'm more free to think about the algorithm as the IDE takes care of finding the members for me.

Does this mean I'm dumber? No it simply means I'm able to focus on the problem I'm actually trying to solve. I feel this makes me more productive and hence smarter not dumber.

Answer 7

The only qualm with IntelliSense that the author seems to have is the autocomplete when you press the space bar, which apparently he doesn't realize you can turn off in the Options menu.

Although, he claims that coding "has become a constant dialog with IntelliSense"... which makes no sense because you still have to pick the correct methods from the list! Without it, you'd simply have to search online for the name of the method instead of an instantaneous search.

It's interesting how the author ignores that IntelliSense can't tell you whether to use a StringBuilder or a String, etc.

Answer 8

I don't think so.

Intellisense makes things like case sensitive spelling easier.

Is it MyArray.Count() or MyArray.Size() or Length(MyArray) ... ? Which return type is a particular method, again? Intellisense saves me a few minutes every day on Google for things like this.

Answer 9

Not at all. When the intellisense list pops up, does a programmer search through the whole list every time to find the function they were looking for? Maybe at first, but normally you keep typing until intellisense narrows down the list to the point where it's faster to use the up/down arrows and tab to complete.

Without intellisense, it would take a little longer to code given that you are experienced with the classes that you're using and a lot longer given that you aren't. It only serves as a speed tool and quick documentation of everything that's available.

Answer 10

Not dumber, it makes us faster :)

Answer 11

Programming is just moving forward to make life easier for the programmer and making him more productive.

It would be like complaining that we don't write assembly code anymore... it's important to know the big concepts and ideas behind it, but working with it would be weird (in most cases).

Answer 12

It doesn't make us dumber; it is a necessity.

Back in the day (MS BASIC for me), there was no need for intellisense. The scope of the language was limited enough for a programmer to remember all keywords and functions.

Jump to today, intellisense is an absolute requirement. Take .Net for example. There is simply no way to remember or discover the many thousands of types, properties and methods. Oh sure, for a very small project you may know a bunch (100s?) of items. But let's be honest - there is no way a modern working programmer could exist without it.

Answer 13

Detail memmorization is not the most important skill in software development. It is better to have problem solving skills and the ability to find the information you need. If you invest more time in the details you will be lost when the next greatest language is born, but algorithms and patterns will still be relevant.

Answer 14

Adding my two cents here.

From my own experience and as mentioned in the TFA I would say that the only drawback I've encountered so far is when you learn the language you might pick up bad habits. Using ArrayLists instead of List only because you're not aware of changing use clauses enables might give you some other datatype.

The author complains over that he gets the wrong datatypes when entering certain datatypes. While some of you will probably get a license, a weapon and start the man hunt, I've found that using naming conventions is an excellent way of forcing the intellisense to be working my way, especially when working in GUI-Control intensive forms & stuff.

Answer 15

The question is of course....does Intellisense make programming less of a skilled profession?

Answer 16

Yes, I agree with the author. Intellisense (and many other Visual Studio features) is indeed "making us dumber" for the reasons mentioned in the article.

That's not always a bad thing. Sometimes it's more desirable to be productive than it is to get smarter. The challenge is striking the right balance. :)

Answer 17

No more so than calculators made for poorer mathematicians and physicists. Sure, using a slide rule forces you to keep a mental model of the order of magnitude of things, but it is really just a tool ... and better tools let you do better work.

Answer 18

This can be abstracted into the traditional question:

Does knowing more about the details help or hurt?

As a rule, experienced engineers and craftsman say, help. But knowing the details also lets you know when the details don't matter, which is what Visual Studio/Intellisense provides. (I'm sure there's a pithy proverb that could be said here, but I don't feel up to thinking up a quip).

Answer 19

Interesting question. Sure I find Intellisense in some sense makes the job easier, but it's kind of like money. The more you have, the more you spend, not necessarily on things you need. I learned to program around '62, and somehow I got along without Intellisense for a really long time. What Intellisense does for me now is help me remember lots of classes and members that as little as 4 years ago I never knew I needed.

There's one tendency I've seen in software that never fails. Nature abhors a vacuum. Machines get bigger, so guess what, software gets bigger (but not always better). Machines get faster, so software gets slower. Now people can get help typing long names, so the code gets really verbose. Now people get help remembering lots of classes, so guess what, there are lots more classes to remember. This goes a long way to helping the software get bigger and slower.

I do a lot of performance tuning, and what is the dominant cause of slowdown? It is galloping generality caused by overdesign with too much data structure, too many classes, and too many layers of abstraction. In a word, "bloat". Here is just a small example.

Answer 20

Dumb & Lazy.

Answer 21

I find Visual Studio's tools conducive towards more experimentation. When you're dealing with the Win32 API in C (for example) you can't really poke around too easily. When you're working with C#, it's a snap to have a little explore around a library and learn what it does without breaking out MSDN or a disassembler for the entire evening.

If you're a naturally curious programmer, Intellisense won't change that. If you're not, Intellisense won't change that either. To paraphrase one of my colleagues "I think it's a waste of time looking through huge books when you can just take an implementation from the web and move on to the next thing".

It's an old argument anyway, pre-Intellisense. Does BASIC rot the mind where writing in x86 doesn't? Is knowing an algorithm inside out relevant when every single programming language you're going to use in your role has a tried and tested library?

I find that those who consider programming a hobby or a skill are inclined to comprehend and investigate. Those who consider it the day job don't. Regardless of any frippery around it, it's more about a programmer's mindset than what is made available.