Re: Code completion in ada IDE's

[Georg Bauhaus <bauhaus@futureapps.de>]

Hyman Rosen wrote:
> Georg Bauhaus wrote:
> 
>>I also know that it stops people from learning because
>>they get the impression they can get by without it.
> 
> 
> "If we don't have it, you don't need it."

Don't get me wrong, nothing wrong with using a computer to
complete what I type. But that is different from not knowing
anything about the word that I will have to type.

identifier.+-----------------
           | bar
           | foo
           | and_so_on

is different from

identifier.f+-------------
            | foo

In the first case I'm really browsing what is available
with identifier. As the OP has explained, I don't have
a clue what identifier is about, and I expect to be "helped"
by spontaneous display of relevant interface documentation.

In the second case I have some idea, however vague, of
what to expect, given identifier.

If there is some regularity in object interfaces, then I can
either

- know the regularity because I have taken the time to
  read about it. This is the case with STL, EiffelBase, Gobo,
  Ada.Containers etc.

- continue browsing the interface via completion etc., believing
  this will remove the necessity to study the ideas behind
  the objects.

A convenience trap.