From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Gutov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: IDE Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 13:47:46 +0300 Message-ID: <561E32D2.4060501@yandex.ru> 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> <561DC925.5050001@siege-engine.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1444819809 4478 80.91.229.3 (14 Oct 2015 10:50:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 10:50:09 +0000 (UTC) To: Eric Ludlam , David Kastrup , emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Oct 14 12:50:04 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 1ZmJd6-00017T-Om for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 12:49:56 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41551 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZmJd5-0006Ev-Tf for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 06:49:55 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39978) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZmJb7-0006C0-A6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 06:47:54 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZmJb3-00043W-6Y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 06:47:53 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-wi0-x22d.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c05::22d]:37658) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZmJb3-00043R-0p; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 06:47:49 -0400 Original-Received: by wijq8 with SMTP id q8so75209203wij.0; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 03:47:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=/C8i8ztMQOuqF7WIJsZZFc7d+dHJVvRSEGn7PZ91ces=; b=EyKsPvnc+zQRqFwZu1HJJ109Xc8bC1APALnIWDEkMO9g41LnEtrWOU/mq8HTNDBo65 QQqDZJ5PSFGy9z1WuCyMes1RJ5aFRK4oQwjrFBR5gb/IM2+uNf70vDxMrQ3ZaUf+NhPr arI4mpB1NJNI/oPLCAI/7dDzY+Xdmyn6Cz+QMUQqirul6Np1YdJu1JM8haqXm+bIQIS8 MuzWisz5wX0otXwzzn/6bNcMDKYily91PJkWIt3jSPQFpLq1NJEaudQhErAjfvj+b5R8 +jUduFHtJX4Ps71kd+zPjJB8QZlNGiUsq6jn/JaPEvjfUAnjej7DqRdkyxqjsPJMpY9a pwew== X-Received: by 10.180.11.175 with SMTP id r15mr27582096wib.74.1444819668185; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 03:47:48 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from [192.168.1.2] ([185.105.175.24]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id bd4sm3305794wjb.15.2015.10.14.03.47.46 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 14 Oct 2015 03:47:47 -0700 (PDT) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:41.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/41.0 In-Reply-To: <561DC925.5050001@siege-engine.com> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:400c:c05::22d 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:191538 Archived-At: On 10/14/2015 06:16 AM, Eric Ludlam wrote: > 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. My already-stated impression is that it's over-specialized and tightly coupled. Not saying that the problem domain is easy, but being able to use different pieces of the solution separately would go a long way towards alleviating the complaint that certain other parts are incomplete. Especially if it were easier to swap in different solutions for some of those parts (and do entirely without some others), and do that in not too many lines, all as part of the user's configuration.