| >No authority told me to use a debugger, I use them because they work for me. They save me time, help me make money, and make it easier and more fun to code. Well, I already wrote: "Few things in development are not based on idiosyncratic preferences, fads, snake oil salesmen, tradition, or appeals to authority". So your case would fall under the first option: it's an unscientifically tested personal preference. >If I ever saw a "research study" that said "print statement users have 12% fewer bugs than debugger users" - or vice versa! - I would dismiss it out of hand. What possible relevance could it have to my work? It could have all the relevance in the world. It's not like if you believe strong enough that your preferred methods are the best (or the "best for you"), that you can't still be using an objectively worse method and get worse results... >And nothing has to be "settled", nor should it be. Well, if software development wants to be like an engineering discipline, many things should be (studied and eventually settled). "Works for me" and letting developers improvise and come with their own hodgepodge of practices, preferences, and cargo cults, is how we got into this mess. |