From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: IDE Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 18:49:51 +0300 Message-ID: <83d1wkozmo.fsf@gnu.org> 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> <83k2qspzx6.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1444665039 24280 80.91.229.3 (12 Oct 2015 15:50:39 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 15:50:39 +0000 (UTC) Cc: dgutov@yandex.ru, rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: John Yates Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Oct 12 17:50:29 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 1ZlfMr-0000oV-81 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 17:50:29 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56250 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZlfMq-0005mZ-GA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 11:50:28 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37398) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZlfMB-0005Cs-0B for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 11:49:52 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZlfM6-00076U-PF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 11:49:46 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout29.012.net.il ([80.179.55.185]:49734) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZlfM6-00076P-D3; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 11:49:42 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.mtaout29.012.net.il by mtaout29.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0NW400B006LR2T00@mtaout29.012.net.il>; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 18:49:03 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.94.185.246]) by mtaout29.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0NW400PEH6LQ0FA0@mtaout29.012.net.il>; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 18:49:03 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 80.179.55.185 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:191357 Archived-At: > Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 05:45:43 -0400 > From: John Yates > Cc: Richard Stallman , Emacs developers , Brief Busters > > All Richard was saying that a debugger front-end is an important part of an > IDE. > > Eli, > > With all due respect, while you may interpret Richard's words in that manner, > that is not what he wrote. I quoted at the top of my posting Richard's very > first sentence that started this extended thread. Here it is again in its > entirety.: > > > Emacs with GUD is an IDE. I'll let it to Richard to tell which interpretation, yours or mine, is closer to what he meant. > Given the amount of influence Richard will exert over efforts to fashion Emacs > into something approximating a modern IDE I believe it is reasonable to wonder > how familiar he is (or is willing to become) with such technologies. We don't usually ask people here to present their credentials before they are allowed to speak up on some issue. Nor do I think we should. FWIW, I never saw Richard speaking about something without knowing the issues, or asking some experts. > When we had the long thread some while back about supporting > completion and refactoring I got the sense that Richard was > unfamiliar with the functionality and user experience of modern > IDEs. IIRC he committed to seeking some outside guidance which might > have included becoming more familiar with the current state of > typical IDEs. If that has yet to happen I wonder how John's > anticipated f2f discussion with Richard will go. I suggest we leave that to the 2 participants ;-)