Re: Problems with QtOctave

[fork]

Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso <jordigh <at> gmail.com> writes:

> 
> 2010/9/2 David Grundberg <davidg <at> cs.umu.se>:
> > So one way to reach out would be to write an Eclipse plugin.  That way
> > we could reach people that want some IDE.  Or Anjuta.  Or KDevelop.
> 
> Or Emacs. But that was called too "macho"?

Doesn't octave-mode support a interactive window, like ESS (at least in theory)?

Re macho -- maybe someone has to worry about non-macho users, but anyone who
might say the word "eigenvalue" should be macho enough to be able to type code
at a prompt...  

> An alternative is to ditch the CLI interface altogether and to do
> something more like a worksheet interface, like what some CASes do.
> Say, for example, wxMaxima. Fundamentally, Maxima is a REPL like
> Octave and its "native" interface is almost the same. On the other
> hand, wxMaxima works like a worksheet, where instead of using readline
> for digging through the history, you just visually scroll up and edit
> whatever command is there.

Ack! Please don't even say "ditch the CLI interface" -- that's crazy talk. 
Maybe supplement it, maybe wrap it in some weird interface so that un-macho
windows users don't freak out, but don't ditch it.  I personally far prefer to
type pwd and dir once in a while than deal with a bunch of crufty garbage
supposedly helping me.

However, I see no reason to emulate the proprietary windows interface with its
slow, icky TOC etc (Java?  I guess everyone was doing it at the time...).

> On 2 September 2010 05:22, Laurent Hoeltgen <hoeltgman <at> gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Somebody on this Mailing list mentioned Cantor
> > (http://edu.kde.org/cantor/) some time ago. I think it's an
> > interesting approach to have a single frontend for different
> > backends. Maybe it's worth to consider that one as well.
> 
> This looks exactly what I'm talking about. I tried it with R, and it
> looks nice. Since it's Qt, it also fits very nice into my Gnome
> environment, and presumably will also look nice on other systems. It
> doesn't have an Octave backend, though. It also doesn't have the cruft
> that other Matlab-interface clones have that people seem to like:

Hmm.  I will look at Cantor and give my fairly unimportant opinion of it.