""Crucially, consistent tools make it easier to switch languages. Devs would then be more likely to use the best language for the job. IDE authors can focus on presentation and editing. This leads to more configurability, scriptability, accessibility in languages.""
I am a (sometimes reluctant) polyglot programmer. Sticking with a single IDE product line (I use IntelliJ, RubyMine and PyCharm for some consistency across Clojure, Java, Ruby, and Python development) helps a lot. Eclipse is another great alternative for a unified development platform.
At SAIC in the late 1980s, we had a small team put together for a job - we were all Lisp hackers and we had a great dev community built around sharing Emacs configurations. A lot of fun but our adhoc tooling would not scale up to a Google or Facebook size engineering infrastructure.
I am a (sometimes reluctant) polyglot programmer. Sticking with a single IDE product line (I use IntelliJ, RubyMine and PyCharm for some consistency across Clojure, Java, Ruby, and Python development) helps a lot. Eclipse is another great alternative for a unified development platform.
At SAIC in the late 1980s, we had a small team put together for a job - we were all Lisp hackers and we had a great dev community built around sharing Emacs configurations. A lot of fun but our adhoc tooling would not scale up to a Google or Facebook size engineering infrastructure.