[approxim8ion]

All these things are exposed by the IDE if you are willing to look for them. This kind of purism is pointless in my opinion. I did start off with just vi and javac and never complained, but I feel like it's just a matter of knowing the tools you use, even if some of them are an abstraction over the barebones stuff.

[Supermancho]

We're talking about how you should learn to use the tools you are using.

Talking about implicitly learning from your IDE is a lot like learning to program with React versus the browser console (or a sandbox). I'm not sure how 'purism' applies.

[chrisseaton]

> We're talking about how you should learn to use the tools you are using.

I don't think there's any difference between using javac and using an IDE. They're both tools that you configure and the press a button to run. What's the difference?

And the danger with saying 'you should understand it at the lower level' is anyone can challenge you if you understand the tools you use at a lower level, and at some point you won't, because nobody understands it all, and then they can point and laugh at you like you're pointing and laughing at others.

[WithinReason]

An IDE and a command line are just different interfaces to the same thing, the compiler. One is not somehow superior to the other, in principle they are interchangeable.

[approxim8ion]

I'm not saying it has to be implicit. If we are talking about a student environment there's no reason why educators can't do a deep dive to explicitly learn the features of the tools they are using.