From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eric Ludlam Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: IDE Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 23:16:53 -0400 Message-ID: <561DC925.5050001@siege-engine.com> References: <5610207A.2000300@harpegolden.net> <83fv1r3gzp.fsf@gnu.org> <83bncf3f9k.fsf@gnu.org> <5610E0BC.8090902@online.de> <83si5r106e.fsf@gnu.org> <831td9z18h.fsf@gnu.org> <5612E996.7090700@yandex.ru> <83bnc7tavr.fsf@gnu.org> <5618C92A.3040207@yandex.ru> <83a8rrt9ag.fsf@gnu.org> <871tcyexa9.fsf@fimbulvetr.bsc.es> <87612a7my2.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1444792679 16037 80.91.229.3 (14 Oct 2015 03:17:59 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 03:17:59 +0000 (UTC) To: David Kastrup , emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Oct 14 05:17:49 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZmCZZ-0007Pb-7S for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 05:17:49 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40316 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZmCZY-0003CK-Ki for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 23:17:48 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36344) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZmCYk-0002sk-LR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 23:16:59 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZmCYh-0006TX-Dk for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 23:16:58 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-qg0-f41.google.com ([209.85.192.41]:33196) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZmCYh-0006TS-9i; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 23:16:55 -0400 Original-Received: by qgeb31 with SMTP id b31so32417859qge.0; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 20:16:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ID1RQBC55Mv1s8O+qN8btZl/HZmtoFvvwaLu0stRnLI=; b=Vjne3zxSCQMAy6DoDFkS2Yi47m8jtGrPMawtKG0KGdlRyqGJQ95wVnKGeg6ECpJ2Tg ab1Hu/tQ3fTH5LRLK8YMqx0ExYZHvnY5ZkbF+xKUxc863OTbLNcWSt8xWjk/UqY5nw3f 2sHKAAAJZU0wnFcs9OPbD8w8neW9GiSAi0Xh0RtF1uSQaHjobJUmnAaPU8yuHxopVRbG PnYcRl/FoHXOF3FtAX2GdyOoYqJROIhCIcCpqP1DYWJUZfSGlQGauro9S7sKGbFIX4CL u6/mqKRq9iPKkWbgOfQAFar7wnFrvOH5GAWoVjtTGPNUFltRzd9jpv7KA2UupAyNOloR zFtw== X-Received: by 10.140.29.164 with SMTP id b33mr966742qgb.37.1444792614780; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 20:16:54 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from [192.168.1.202] (pool-71-184-198-118.bstnma.fios.verizon.net. [71.184.198.118]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id t37sm2573383qge.26.2015.10.13.20.16.53 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 13 Oct 2015 20:16:53 -0700 (PDT) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 In-Reply-To: <87612a7my2.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 209.85.192.41 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:191527 Archived-At: On 10/13/2015 12:28 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > "John Wiegley" writes: > >>>>>>> Lluís writes: >> >>> Eli Zaretskii writes: >>> [...] >>>>> For C/C++, the community has Irony and Rtags, both based on libclang. If >>>>> libclang is unacceptable for you, you probably know a more appropriate >>>>> mailing list to bring that up at. >> >>>> Let's not reiterate past discussions: you forget CEDET. >> >> CEDET first came out in 2003. If it were the answer to our present >> questions, we would not be asking them. > > But since it did come out in 2003, we really should be asking _why_ it > isn't the answer to our present questions, in order to avoid the effort > of creating CEDET2 and CEDET3. Based on the many emails I've seen on the topic, I suspect the answer is: * It is hard to configure (ie - setting up project files, include paths, or whatever.) * Specific implementations are incomplete (ie - c++ || other parser is imperfect, the project system doesn't implement some feature, etc) * It is compared against better staffed tools >> I'm willing to hear how CEDET can offer solutions to issues we've >> brought up, but I won't curtail the discussion "because CEDET". > > I don't think the idea is to curtail it but rather to _shape_ it. If we > decide we need $x and CEDET provides $x, then either we haven't fully > figured out the details of the $x we need or CEDET does something wrong > when providing it. Figuring out either will hopefully save us time in > arriving at something actually doing what we want. My main concern is about folks claiming CEDET is complicated (which it is) then oversimplifying the problem space to kick off some new thing which will likely end up just as complicated. I know I thought the problem space seemed simple when I started. I might not have started if I'd known how big it is. Eric