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: Sun, 18 Oct 2015 19:55:35 +0300 Message-ID: <83r3ksi0ag.fsf@gnu.org> References: <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> <561E32D2.4060501@yandex.ru> <83wpum3ozk.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1445187375 29260 80.91.229.3 (18 Oct 2015 16:56:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2015 16:56:15 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: John Wiegley Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Oct 18 18:56:07 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 1ZnrFe-0004zW-31 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 18 Oct 2015 18:56:06 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34651 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZnrFd-0005LW-7p for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 18 Oct 2015 12:56:05 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40846) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZnrFH-0005Ju-0g for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Oct 2015 12:55:44 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZnrFD-0007G7-R5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Oct 2015 12:55:42 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout26.012.net.il ([80.179.55.182]:46117) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZnrFB-0007Fg-Rw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Oct 2015 12:55:39 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.mtaout26.012.net.il by mtaout26.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0NWF00N00DOFD900@mtaout26.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Oct 2015 19:58:47 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.94.185.246]) by mtaout26.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0NWF00KL0DTY6Q30@mtaout26.012.net.il>; Sun, 18 Oct 2015 19:58:47 +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: 80.179.55.182 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:191973 Archived-At: > From: John Wiegley > Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2015 22:23:30 -0700 > > >>>>> Eli Zaretskii writes: > > > I'm quite sure CEDET has collected and expressed in code a lot of experience > > and solutions to many problems that arise in the context of building an IDE. > > It's OK to discard that, if we sure that's the proverbial 1st variant > > everyone throws away, but we need first to be sure we know what we are > > discarding. > > I'm not suggesting we discard experiences. What I'm saying is: it doesn't make > sense to proceed by looking at CEDET, and then asking what should be changed. > > CEDET is like a hammer. When it was made, the problem looked like nail. > > Today, the problem might be a screw (is it? do we know?). We're not going to > arrive at the best answer by asking ourselves how a hammer can be changed to > meet the needs of a screw. It deserves looking at the problem anew. > > It doesn't mean we throw out the hammer. Maybe we do have a nail, maybe we > don't. The point is: If we make technical assumptions before learning what we > want to end up with, we're going to arrive at something shaped more by those > assumptions than by our needs. I wasn't aware that the IDE landscape might have changed in such a significant way recently. This discussion seems to focus on details, which seems to indicate no such radical changes happened. But I'm not an expert, so maybe you are right. I did suggest up-thread to come up with a list of main features we think an Emacs IDE should have. If that is what you have in mind, I obviously agree. In any case, CEDET is not an EDE, AFAIK. It is an infrastructure and a set of tools for building an IDE. IOW, it's neither a hammer nor a screwdriver, but something that allows us to make one or the other (or something else entirely). So it could very well be a good basis for an Emacs IDE.