emacs-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: IDE


From: Przemysław Wojnowski
Subject: Re: IDE
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2015 11:08:31 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0

W dniu 18.10.2015 o 00:37, Dmitry Gutov pisze:
On 10/18/2015 01:28 AM, Przemysław Wojnowski wrote:

I don't think it is possible, because languages are very different and
their
surrounding tooling is very different.

The meanings of "go to definition", "find references" and "complete text at
point" are very much the same across languages.
Yes, and EDE could be changed to provide such API.

Some refactorings, too.
And some are not and will never be, because languages are too different. So
IDE's support for them will be different or crippled to the lowest denominator
as you seem to suggest.

Yes. And I've looked at EDE at SF
(http://sourceforge.net/p/cedet/git/ci/master/tree/lisp/cedet/ede/).
There's support for many types of projects, build tools, etc. There are
even some tests.

A more idiomatic, Emacs-y
What does that mean? Is it described somewhere what is idiomatic in Emacs Lisp?

API that isn't tied to CEDET, that's friendly to
third-party packages, and doesn't ask its caller to know the intricacies of
EDE's object hierarchies.
Yes. This part would need to be changed in EDE.

You're welcome to work on making EDE more flexible, though. We can compare
progress later.
I don't waste resources on duplicated efforts just to show my ego. Have many other things to work on.

What's the point of reimplementing that from scratch?

We can reuse code from EDE, if it fits.
Depending on what you means by "it fits", but if that's possible, it's ok for
me.

My only concern is that EDE is something that already works, but needs improvement. Creating, more or less, the same from scratch is IMHO reinventing the wheel, which may not even end being as round as EDE is.

Also reusing EDE maybe would "reuse" developers that were/are working on it and
hence Emacs would have another contributors for free. Not doing so may mean
that some devs will work on EDE and some on project.el, duplicating many things
and loosing steam by lone work. Future? Two incomplete packages that do mostly
the same, but unusable for users - the most common scenario in open source
world (see JDEE, malabar-mode, eclim).



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]