Hacker News Reader

Comment by cogman10 | Hacker News Reader

I think language matters quite a bit when it comes to how useful this is.

For simpler syntaxes like C or Java, I think the highlighting adds little. But as a language allows for more complex things like monkey patching or helper methods and the like, a little bit of color is really helpful. Knowing immediately that a method is built into the SDK or that it's some monkey patch that's been added gives me better understanding on what the code is doing.

That said, "go to definition" and "autocomplete" are the most important tools to me when it comes to coding.

View on HN

I was an engineer on the Visual Studio team when we first introduced syntax highlighting and code completion. The rollout triggered quite a bit of internal controversy. A sizable group of developers strongly opposed these features—syntax coloring, parameter completion, signature validation—arguing that “real programmers write their code unaided.”

I can’t help but wonder how those same engineers are adapting to the current wave of AI-powered development tools like Claude Code and Cursor.

I will say this, I don't see how these aids can hurt someone's ability to write code.

In that, I think there is a difference between those tools and AI. AI can write code fast, but can definitely also hurt your ability maintain a codebase if you aren't keeping it in check.

I don't think there's any level where synatax highlighting could make a codebase worse.

When a coworker pastes a screenshot of their syntax highlighted code with a black background into chat it is functionally 50% blank as my 55 year old eyes are not good at low contrast. Regular blue, purples and reds are often unreadable against a black background.

Fortunately syntax highlighting isn’t part of the code, it’s just how it’s displayed. There comes a point where pasting images of code, to preserve syntax highlighting, into chats, email, and documentation it’s not only a waste of space, it becomes an ADA issue. Use whatever fonts and themes in your editor, but keep those to yourself.

I'm guessing they used the same argument that was made for calculators, printing... By lessening the burden on your brain you weaken it.

When making a typo one guy I knew deleted the whole word with backspace and typed it new from the beginning. Anything else to correct the error he called cheating.

That was a long time ago - and he was still young. But not so long ago I asked some keyboard manufacturer (Ducky?!) to add more macro features for productivity - and I got the answer that it would be cheating to play back macros faster than normal writing speed - Recording macros on a keyboard and playing it back faster than recorded was impossible by design because they don't want to support cheaters.

Oh those coders... I wonder how much code on Github is invalid because of cheating...

I'm pretty sure Turbo Pascal/C/etc and perhaps vim had syntax highlighting (though perhaps not the other bits) before the first VS release, I'm surprised they hadn't encountered it already.

It wasn't that it was "new" (you're correct, it wasn't). The complaint was that Microsoft engineers were going to use it "as a crutch".

Also, VS (codename Boston) was used as the de-facto internal development IDE for a few years before it we released it to the public. There were also arguments about shipping those types of features publicly.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com