Why tools for developer are simpler than tools for 3D Graphs?

Have a look to the interface of 3D Studio Max, Revit, Photoshop, Autocad or ZBrush. They are able to handle a huge complexity in a modular way.

Visual Studio or Eclipse are text editors.. in the last years everything became interfaces, OOP, WCF, Castle, WPF, DTO, mapping, Frameworks. Development nowaday has a strong overhead. The standardization is pushing it to become modular and software understandable (a HTML / WPF code is strongly understandable by an editor. So they made editor like Blend. While making a visual editor for c, c#, java, php, javascript code is more hard (see refactoring for resharper)..

The stricter are the conventions, the more modular and standardized is a code, the easier is to make an editor for that language).


I'm having a hard time understanding what you are asking. In particular, what's that last line doing there? And why the comparison between editors and various 3D graphics tools? (BTW, there's a big difference between photoshop and autocad.)

It looks like you are asking for people's opinions. Opinion-based questions are strictly off-topic all across the stackexchange network. This question falls into the editor flamewar category. This topic has been debated with no resolution from well before the days of vi vs emacs vs nano. Opinion-based questions that invite a flamewar are extremely off-topic.

Don't ask this question.

  • 4
    I thought vi(m) vs emacs was settled with vi(m) clearly winning. You mean to tell me this has all been a lie?!
    – enderland
    Mar 31 '16 at 0:05

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .