Specifically in Rust, you can use the language to guide you through things like refactoring, thread synchronization, correctness verification and a lot of other things. But you have to run the compiler.
But you can say the same for Java. IntelliJ IDEA internally does equivalent of compilation and tells me exactly where my code would fail to compile.
So in a sense I am not strictly practicing my approach, but I also don't see reason to do so if the tools are reliably giving me hints when I made mistake writing something that will not compile.
I’m looking forward to someone making a legit IDE/suite with support, no indication of it yet but I assume some day!
Rust, well, "works". But there is still a bunch of issues so I keep developing using C until I get the kinks ironed out.
Developing in an IDE that compiles almost continuously is about as far from the development philosophy you're advocating for here as one could get :P
This isn't about throwing away tools for some idealized goal. It is about using the tools that are available to achieve best results without making you reliant on the tools to the point you don't know what your program is going to do without compiling and running.
IDE helps catch a lot of stupid simple mistakes and that helps save time. Why would that be bad?
> It looks really strange to me to observe other developers constantly compiling and running their code just to see if it works. It kinda looks as if they did not exactly understand what they are doing because if they did, they would be confident the implementation works.
Explain to me how this statement doesn't apply to your use of an IDE, but the other engineers you've observed don't understand what they're doing.