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: Sat, 10 Oct 2015 14:03:40 +0300 Message-ID: <83lhbbrnn7.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> <83bnc7tavr.fsf@gnu.org> <5618C92A.3040207@yandex.ru> <83a8rrt9ag.fsf@gnu.org> <5618D376.1080700@yandex.ru> <831td3t62e.fsf@gnu.org> <5618E51D.4070800@yandex.ru> <83twpzrp05.fsf@gnu.org> <5618ED93.8000001@yandex.ru> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1444475050 5137 80.91.229.3 (10 Oct 2015 11:04:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2015 11:04:10 +0000 (UTC) Cc: adatgyujto@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Dmitry Gutov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Oct 10 13:04:02 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 1ZkrwR-00063x-UI for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 13:03:56 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:44465 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZkrwR-0002LN-Fr for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 07:03:55 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50033) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZkrwD-0002L6-8m for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 07:03:42 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zkrw8-00021x-8h for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 07:03:41 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout28.012.net.il ([80.179.55.184]:35201) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zkrw7-00021Z-T1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 07:03:36 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.mtaout28.012.net.il by mtaout28.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0NW000F003UHVC00@mtaout28.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 14:03:02 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.94.185.246]) by mtaout28.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0NW000E8U4125N20@mtaout28.012.net.il>; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 14:03:02 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: <5618ED93.8000001@yandex.ru> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 80.179.55.184 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:191126 Archived-At: > Cc: adatgyujto@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org > From: Dmitry Gutov > Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2015 13:50:59 +0300 > > On 10/10/2015 01:34 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > >> "We need a common interface for refactoring tools" sounds like a good > >> problem statement. > > > > Is IDE just about refactoring? I thought it meant much more. > > The above more focused and, as such, more useful. "Comprehensive IDE > features" is not as useful. But it narrows the field too much, IMO. > >> A comprehensive set of IDE features might be too lofty a goal for us, in > >> the foreseeable future. > > > > Depends on how many people will work on it. > > How many people would you expect to work on it in the near future, > realistically? I don't know. If we cannot find enough, then it simply means it will take more time to implement the features sequentially rather than in parallel. > > In any case, having some > > high-level design that is targeted by all the components will ensure > > more or less seamless integration when each component becomes > > available. > > From where I'm standing, this sentence is not useful. Not only you're > asking for a big design, you don't present a justification for it, e.g. > how it would be reflected in all components. Are you saying that high-level design is generally not useful, and should be avoided, unless "justified"? That goes against the engineering principles that the whole industry abides by. > > Last time I looked the IDEs I sometimes look at (Visual Studio and > > Eclipse) present a much more pleasant UI for completion. Why can't we > > present something similar? > > Well, that hurts (a bit). Sorry. > If Company's tooltip is not pleasant, what would be pleasant for > you? I just gave you 2 examples. And it's not really about me, it's about the expectations of users out there. Don't they expect something they see elsewhere?