> Regarding the comment about the debugging. For me personally, I always take the time to study the code first before I start debugging. A lot of times I already find the problem by just reading the code and even if that is not the case, I have a much better understanding about how the code is supposed to behave and that makes the debugging session a lot more useful. And I say that because I have the impression that it is common for developers to dive straight into a debugging session without a good understanding of what the code is doing or trying to do.

I don’t understand this sentiment about “modern” (interactive, user friendly) debuggers.

Simply because you have a tool doesn’t mean you have to skip the step of trying to understand the code. Is the suggestion seriously to avoid having tools that are objectively better because there may be a temptation to use them too early, whereas having only more primitive tools would do better?

I have seen the same argument about syntax highlighting. That pretty colors makes for sloppy code reading and monochrome text means you read slower and thus more thoroughly…