From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?UTF-8?Q?Przemys=c5=82aw_Wojnowski?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: IDE Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2015 00:28:16 +0200 Message-ID: <5622CB80.4090700@cumego.com> References: <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> <561E32D2.4060501@yandex.ru> <83wpum3ozk.fsf@gnu.org> <87si59ln6u.fsf@isaac.fritz.box> <56224B63.3010803@yandex.ru> <87k2qlldny.fsf@isaac.fritz.box> <5622AD4D.3010504@yandex.ru> <5622C5BA.2070209@cumego.com> <5622C696.2070200@yandex.ru> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1445120933 30076 80.91.229.3 (17 Oct 2015 22:28:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2015 22:28:53 +0000 (UTC) Cc: John Wiegley , Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Dmitry Gutov , David Engster Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Oct 18 00:28:47 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 1ZnZy2-0000z7-Gi for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 18 Oct 2015 00:28:46 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59963 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZnZy1-0008Lc-OZ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 18:28:45 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58670) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZnZxk-0008LM-2K for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 18:28:31 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZnZxa-0004Bg-IC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 18:28:21 -0400 Original-Received: from smtp23.iq.pl ([86.111.242.228]:34128) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZnZxa-0004AH-84 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 18:28:18 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail 31436 invoked from network); 17 Oct 2015 22:28:16 -0000 Original-Received: from unknown (HELO [192.168.1.106]) (esperanto@cumego.com@[159.205.196.239]) (envelope-sender ) by smtp22.iq.pl with AES128-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 17 Oct 2015 22:28:16 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 In-Reply-To: <5622C696.2070200@yandex.ru> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 86.111.242.228 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:191898 Archived-At: W dniu 18.10.2015 o 00:07, Dmitry Gutov pisze: > On 10/18/2015 01:03 AM, Przemysław Wojnowski wrote: > >> I think it is not a problem. An IDE could switch (or enable) language >> backend >> depending on current language. For C-like (or maybe statically typed in >> general) languages (covering most of programming world) could use >> Semantic, for >> other languages maybe something other (like tern for JS). > > It would be better if we could support a set of common operations for both > static and dynamic languages. If those were implemented by Semantic by static > languages, more power to it. I don't think it is possible, because languages are very different and their surrounding tooling is very different. >>> The EDE subthread also brought up some ideas for project.el. >> Does that mean that you don't want to reuse EDE, but reimplement everything >> from scratch? Don't you think it would be better to reuse what already >> is and >> just change parts of it to be more flexible? > > Have you looked at lisp/progmodes/project.el yet? 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. What's the point of reimplementing that from scratch?