I also don't use syntax highlighting because I prefer not to. But what makes it childish for other people? Let other people optimise their workflow as it suits them.
And things are often colour coded for adults to help them differentiate information quickly as well. Are yellow hazard signs childish or the different colours on traffic lights?
tl;dr: A piano with colored keys (other than black/white) would "look childish". I don't even understand why this is a debate. It seems to be more about being offended by being called childish vs. thinking about what the actual issue is. And it's not even about being called childish, it's about someone who thinks syntax highlighting looks childish.
Edit: Also, traffic signs are colored to help you make quick decisions in an unfamiliar environment. A musical instrument isn't an unfamiliar environment for long. Nor is reading code.
Coloured other than black and white? So it's about certain colours then. Perhaps if they used different shades of gray on their code it would look more grown up.
I disagree that a piece of code ever becomes as familiar as an instrument. I've actually done both coding and music professionally. Once you learn an instrument you know it to the point you can close your eyes and play what you want. But I was very rarely reading the same code for very long periods, and as such I was always navigating new structures in a sense.
> It seems to be more about being offended by being called childish vs. thinking about what the actual issue is
Yes, that's exactly it. It's very rude to dismiss other people's needs as childish just because you don't share them. No one needs to discuss if highlighting is useful or not, we are all grownups capable of making that decision. I'm myself surprised that this needs to be pointed out
> Coloured other than black and white? So it's about certain colours then.
That's the most reasonable way I am able to interpret what the original author was saying (tongue-in-cheek). Maybe it was a super petulant/arrogant/narrow way of viewing things but I prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt.
> I disagree that a piece of code ever becomes as familiar as an instrument. I've actually done both coding and music professionally. Once you learn an instrument you know it to the point you can close your eyes and play what you want. But I was very rarely reading the same code for very long periods, and as such I was always navigating new structures in a sense.
Keep in mind I happily use syntax highlighting myself (to the point of feeling crippled without it). I'm just trying to put myself in the shoes of someone who a) claims to not use it and b) sees it as "childish" (presumably because of being colorful and looking playful).
I've also played music (part-time professionally) and agree that it's not a direct comparison. But you're also kind of illustrating my point: With the instrument your mind creates a bunch of patterns (note placement and fingerings) to the point where you can play the instrument without the instrument, not only making color-coded keys/strings completely redundant after the initial familiarization process but even the whole visual experience! So without a doubt do colored piano keys look childish to a professional.
With coding you obviously cannot get rid of the need for visuals completely, but (I imagine) without syntax highlighting your brain is forced to use other methods of quickly identifying comments, functions, variables etc. Like ear training. If you use notation as a crutch to learn songs you won't develop the proper pattern recocnition required to identify notes/intervals/chords by ear. And while you're right that you're rarely looking at the same code for long periods of time, you're still looking at functions, objects, variables, constructors etc, like when learning music by ear. Maybe a better analogy would be using some kind of transcription software rather than your ears (with the argument that it's more precise than your ears etc etc). :D
I am not a neuroscientist so I cannot compare non-colored pattern recognition to the reading/grokking proficiency acquired through using syntax highlighting, but I'm doubtful that many people commenting on this topic are either. And thus I just wanted to bring forth an alternative viewpoint on this.
And for this being practicable, what I assume your main point is, the non-syntax-highlighting camp would only have a strong argument in favor of it if the end goal was to eventually work without it (like a pianist eventually not looking at the keys anymore). In that case it would (likely) act as a crutch, hindering the pattern recognition from forming. The scenario of not having syntax highlighting available only happens intermittently IRL, like sometimes being forced to use `less` to read code without syntax highlighting and feeling annoyed/crippled because your pattern recognition isn't trained to read it comfortably. For me it's a compromise I'm easily willing to make but I'm also not going to bash others for choosing a different path.
I now feel a bit tempted to try going without syntax highlighting for a couple of weeks and see how it goes. I used to do it all the time back in the day (BASIC, Turbo Pascal, batch scripts etc) but that was quite a while ago.
> Yes, that's exactly it. It's very rude to dismiss other people's needs as childish just because you don't share them. No one needs to discuss if highlighting is useful or not, we are all grownups capable of making that decision. I'm myself surprised that this needs to be pointed out
The responses I was reading was mostly people getting defensive very quickly, offended by how someone dares to claim that their method is not The Right Way™. I saw it (and still see it) in a way more light-hearted way of expressing the difference in approaches, rather than being dismissive. :shrug:
Perhaps like jazz vs. classical musicians, one joking about the other's sense of time and the other about their sloppiness or lack of sight-reading skills. Only an insecure musician (or autist) would take those comments seriously. They are different styles of music and require quite different approaches. It's completely okay (or should be!) to make fun of them from the viewpoint of a completely different approach. No one with a proper understanding of the difference in styles would feel the need to defend against such a comment (or take them seriously to begin with).
