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, 17 Oct 2015 10:58:55 +0300 Message-ID: <83wpum3ozk.fsf@gnu.org> References: <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> <561E32D2.4060501@yandex.ru> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1445068760 24075 80.91.229.3 (17 Oct 2015 07:59:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2015 07:59:20 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: John Wiegley Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Oct 17 09:59:12 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 1ZnMOV-0005mM-4L for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 09:59:11 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57439 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZnMOU-0004cG-75 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 03:59:10 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41541) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZnMOH-0004bz-5u for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 03:58:58 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZnMOD-0001PZ-Tz for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 03:58:57 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout27.012.net.il ([80.179.55.183]:44277) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZnMOD-0001OZ-HX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 03:58:53 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.mtaout27.012.net.il by mtaout27.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0NWC00700THRJV00@mtaout27.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 10:54:46 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.94.185.246]) by mtaout27.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0NWC0034XTZ9CF50@mtaout27.012.net.il>; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 10:54:46 +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: 80.179.55.183 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:191812 Archived-At: > From: "John Wiegley" > Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 15:58:57 -0700 > > >>>>> Dmitry Gutov writes: > > > 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. > > You've taken the reply right out of my mouth, Dmitry. David's response was > also very much in line with my thinking. As I said before, if CEDET were the > answer to our questions, we wouldn't still be asking them. Could it be that we don't understand the answer? I'd suggest to be very careful with such conclusions. They can only be valid when based on a detailed analysis of what is and isn't in CEDET, and on good knowledge and understanding of its design and implementation. My impression so far is that neither is particularly true, and my evidence is the number of times Eric and David Engster described some CEDET features that came as a surprise to us. 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.