C Programmer's Environment

[Stephen J. Friedl]

In article <4700039 at m.cs.uiuc.edu>, kenny at m.cs.uiuc.edu writes:
> 
> But, if you're a system administrator, *don't* force your users to
> scrap their favorite environments unless it's necessary to preserve
> consistency of your product.  I've had the experience of working on a
> system where the sysadmin wouldn't *allow* me to use emacs (which was
> on the system, but available only to users with a `documented need')
> because `vi is better, anyway.'  Annoying, at best; crippling, at
> worst.

One must be careful with this kind of statement.  Certainly,
there is a benefit if everybody can use the tools with which they
are most comfortable.  However, a company doesn't have to be
producing a "product" to make restrictions on tools relevant.

How about this one:
In an office with a lot of people using spreadsheets, databases,
word processors, everybody uses Lotus 1-2-3, dBase, and
WordPerfect.  Everybody is happy.  Then somebody is hired who is
realy comfortable with some other set of tools.  He tears into
everything and becomes really productive, and everybody is still
happy.  Then he leaves for whatever reason, and now nobody can
figure out any of his stuff.  They can't run payroll, read any of
his WP files, etc.  Then the new guy wonders why the management
says "you will use *these* tools."

Whether somebody uses emacs or vi doesn't really have the impact
of other things like compilers, but in many environments,
personal productivity is not the highest measure.

     Steve

P.S. - Sorry to be a wet blanket :-(
-- 
Stephen J. Friedl / V-Systems, Inc. / Santa Ana, CA / +1 714 545 6442 
3B2-kind-of-guy   / friedl at vsi.com  / {attmail, uunet, etc}!vsi!friedl
                                          ---> vsi!bang!friedl <-- NEW
"Friends don't let friends run Xenix" - me