Re: maintain flymake.el

[Jan Djärv]

Hello.

16 dec 2013 kl. 15:32 skrev Ted Zlatanov <address@hidden>:

> On Sun, 15 Dec 2013 19:31:46 +0100 Sebastian Wiesner <address@hidden> wrote: 
> 
> SW> 2013/12/14 Sebastian Wiesner <address@hidden>:
>>> I hope to finish the document by tomorrow evening, and will come back
>>> if it's done.
> 
> SW> I have completed the document now.  The final version is to be found
> SW> at https://github.com/flycheck/flycheck/wiki/Flycheck-versus-Flymake.
> SW> It's a thorough write-up of the differences and similarities between
> SW> Flycheck and Flymake, and probably also a comprehensive summary of the
> SW> current issues and weaknesses in Flymake.
> 
> SW> Again, it's probably unfairly biased towards Flycheck.  I tried my
> SW> best to be neutral, but I consider Flycheck superior and think that
> SW> the design and implementation of Flymake are somewhat broken, so I may
> SW> have failed to properly account for Flymake's features and strengths.
> SW> Please excuse this, and feel free to correct any mistakes I may have
> SW> made.
> 
> SW> Please also suggest improvements, such as additional aspects which
> SW> should be covered, or report issues, such as missing details in the
> SW> comparsion.


You are missing the big think that separates flymake and flycheck.  Flymake 
uses makefiles, flycheck does not.  This means to be able to use flycheck on a 
large C/C++ project you have to maintain includes and defined in both makefiles 
and as lisp variables for flycheck.  Flymake does not have that problem, you 
just add one rule for it in the makefiles, re-using all definitions and include 
paths.

This is really a showstopper for flycheck, even if it has some nicer GUI stuff. 
 It is really only usable for small projects.

Disclaimer: This might have changed since I last checked.

        Jan D.