If this is your first time using Django, you’ll have to take care of some initial setup. Namely, you’ll need to auto-generate some code that establishes a Django project – a collection of settings for an instance of Django, including database configuration, Django-specific options and application-specific settings.
$ django-admin startproject mysite
Similarly, PyCharm doesn't seem to have an issue with offering to generate methods for classes (ALT + INSERT), such as override methods (__class__, __init__, __new__, __setattr__, __eq__, __ne__, __str__, __repr__, __hash__, __format__, __getattribute__, __delattr__, __sizeof__, __reduce__, __reduce_ex__, __dir__, __init__), implementing methods, generating tests and copyright information.
I don't see why CLI tools would be treated any differently or why code generation should be considered an anti-pattern since it's additive in nature and is entirely optional, hence asking to learn more.
First of all, just because a tool or project uses a pattern, it doesn't mean that it's a good idea. Second, code generation as part of IDE or one-time setup is something else.
I need to clarify: when I say that "code generation" is an anti-pattern, I'm talking about the traditional, two-step process where you generate some code in one process, and then execute it in another. But Python works really well with a different type of "code generation".
Someone once said that the only thing missing from Python is a macro language; but that is not true - Python has its own macro language, and it's called Python.
Python is dynamically evaluated and executed, so there is no reason why we need two separate steps when generating code dynamically; in Python, the right way is not to dynamically construct the textual representation of code, but rather to dynamically construct runtime entities (classes, functions etc), and then use them straight away, in the same process.
Unless you're dynamically building hundreds of such constructs (and if you do you have a bigger problem), any performance impact is negligible.
> Someone once said that the only thing missing from Python is a macro language
Ahh, then it feels like we're talking about different things here! The type of code generation that i was talking about was more along the lines of tools that allow you to automatically write some of the repetitive boilerplate code that's needed for one reason or another, such as objects that map to your DB structure and so on. Essentially things that a person would have to do manually otherwise, as opposed to introducing preprocessors and macros.
Hmm, i don't think that i've ever heard of this. Would you care to provide any sources, since that sounds like an interesting stance to take?
So far, it seems like frameworks like Django don't have an issue with CLI tools to generate bits of code, i.e. https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/3.2/intro/tutorial01/
Similarly, PyCharm doesn't seem to have an issue with offering to generate methods for classes (ALT + INSERT), such as override methods (__class__, __init__, __new__, __setattr__, __eq__, __ne__, __str__, __repr__, __hash__, __format__, __getattribute__, __delattr__, __sizeof__, __reduce__, __reduce_ex__, __dir__, __init__), implementing methods, generating tests and copyright information.I don't see why CLI tools would be treated any differently or why code generation should be considered an anti-pattern since it's additive in nature and is entirely optional, hence asking to learn more.