Current State of CEDET in Emacs tree and standalone

Current State of CEDET in Emacs tree and standalone

[Andreas Marschke]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1152 bytes --]

Hi all!

In a quest to add some improvements to CEDET/Semantic I came across the
fact of the splintered codebases people are potentially working on.

We have the CEDET project on SourceForge with changes going beyond the
initial import into emacs.
And then there is the version shipped with Emacs.

When comparing the code basis one of the most immediate things that struck
me, was the availability of tests and that there was even rudimentary unit
testing employed, This is not the case for the code in Emacs tree.

Are there efforts to import the code from Sourceforge anew into the emacs
tree or is it intended to remain there as it pertains to features not
intended to be shipped with Emacs?

If possible I'd like to use the existing unit-test infrastructure in the
emacs tree to add validation to the changes that I'm making and since as I
understand it, there's otherwise existing development effort still going
into the code shipped with emacs I'd prefer  to not double my efforts and
have to make it shippable/maintainable in 2 places.

Any and all explanations of the current situation would be very welcome.

Kind regards,

Andreas Marschke.

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 1399 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 202 bytes --]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 173 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
cedet-semantic mailing list
cedet-semantic@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cedet-semantic

Re: Current State of CEDET in Emacs tree and standalone

[Noam Postavsky]

On 10 July 2018 at 09:09, Andreas Marschke <andreas.marschke@gmail.com> wrote:

> Are there efforts to import the code from Sourceforge anew into the emacs
> tree or is it intended to remain there as it pertains to features not
> intended to be shipped with Emacs?

There is a long-running/stalled effort towards this.

https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=23792
https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=28878

Re: Current State of CEDET in Emacs tree and standalone

[Joshua Branson]

Andreas Marschke <andreas.marschke@gmail.com> writes:

> Hi all!
>
> In a quest to add some improvements to CEDET/Semantic I came across the fact of the splintered codebases people are potentially working on.
>
> We have the CEDET project on SourceForge with changes going beyond the initial import into emacs. 
> And then there is the version shipped with Emacs.
>
> When comparing the code basis one of the most immediate things that struck me, was the availability of tests and that there was even rudimentary unit testing employed, This is not the case
> for the code in Emacs tree.
>
> Are there efforts to import the code from Sourceforge anew into the emacs tree or is it intended to remain there as it pertains to features not intended to be shipped with Emacs?
>

Not to be a debbie downer, but is CEDIT worthwhile to continue?
(admittedly I really don't know much about CEDIT).  I'm under the
impression that semantic may not be needed, since microsoft is pushing
the LSP (language server protocal).

Just curious,

Joshua

Re: Current State of CEDET in Emacs tree and standalone

[Andreas Marschke]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1907 bytes --]

I haven't looked into LSP in detail and probably should, but so far I think
what I want to do with
it should be possible with portions of CEDET/semantic.

Even if CEDET does not warrant continuation, how would you define
obsoletion?

I'm working mostly with Java applications mobile native and server side as
well as small and
midsized nodejs projects. If LSP can work for these environments I'd be
happy to have a look.

Thanks,

Andreas Marschke.

On Thu, 19 Jul 2018 at 16:41, Joshua Branson <jbranso@fastmail.com> wrote:

> Andreas Marschke <andreas.marschke@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > Hi all!
> >
> > In a quest to add some improvements to CEDET/Semantic I came across the
> fact of the splintered codebases people are potentially working on.
> >
> > We have the CEDET project on SourceForge with changes going beyond the
> initial import into emacs.
> > And then there is the version shipped with Emacs.
> >
> > When comparing the code basis one of the most immediate things that
> struck me, was the availability of tests and that there was even
> rudimentary unit testing employed, This is not the case
> > for the code in Emacs tree.
> >
> > Are there efforts to import the code from Sourceforge anew into the
> emacs tree or is it intended to remain there as it pertains to features not
> intended to be shipped with Emacs?
> >
>
> Not to be a debbie downer, but is CEDIT worthwhile to continue?
> (admittedly I really don't know much about CEDIT).  I'm under the
> impression that semantic may not be needed, since microsoft is pushing
> the LSP (language server protocal).
>
> Just curious,
>
> Joshua
>
>

-- 
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,

Andreas Marschke.
_________________________________________________________
Web: http://www.andreas-marschke.name
Blog: http://andreasmarschke.wordpress.com
Github: http://github.com/andreas-marschke

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2892 bytes --]

Re: Current State of CEDET in Emacs tree and standalone

[Richard Stallman]

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

  >   I'm under the
  > impression that semantic may not be needed, since microsoft is pushing
  > the LSP (language server protocal).

We don't have a GNU language server; what we do have is CEDET.
So we should continue maintaining CEDET.

-- 
Dr Richard Stallman
President, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)

Re: Current State of CEDET in Emacs tree and standalone

[Joshua Branson]

Andreas Marschke <andreas.marschke@gmail.com> writes:

> I haven't looked into LSP in detail and probably should, but so far I think what I want to do with 
> it should be possible with portions of CEDET/semantic. 
>
> Even if CEDET does not warrant continuation, how would you define obsoletion?

I actually don't know.  I'll have to think about that one.

>
> I'm working mostly with Java applications mobile native and server side as well as small and 
> midsized nodejs projects. If LSP can work for these environments I'd be happy to have a look.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Andreas Marschke.
>
> On Thu, 19 Jul 2018 at 16:41, Joshua Branson <jbranso@fastmail.com> wrote:
>
>  Andreas Marschke <andreas.marschke@gmail.com> writes:
>
>  > Hi all!
>  >
>  > In a quest to add some improvements to CEDET/Semantic I came across the fact of the splintered codebases people are potentially working on.
>  >
>  > We have the CEDET project on SourceForge with changes going beyond the initial import into emacs. 
>  > And then there is the version shipped with Emacs.
>  >
>  > When comparing the code basis one of the most immediate things that struck me, was the availability of tests and that there was even rudimentary unit testing employed, This is not
>  the case
>  > for the code in Emacs tree.
>  >
>  > Are there efforts to import the code from Sourceforge anew into the emacs tree or is it intended to remain there as it pertains to features not intended to be shipped with Emacs?
>  >
>
>  Not to be a debbie downer, but is CEDIT worthwhile to continue?
>  (admittedly I really don't know much about CEDIT).  I'm under the
>  impression that semantic may not be needed, since microsoft is pushing
>  the LSP (language server protocal).
>
>  Just curious,
>
>  Joshua

Re: Current State of CEDET in Emacs tree and standalone

[Joshua Branson]

Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:

> [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
> [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
> [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
>
>   >   I'm under the
>   > impression that semantic may not be needed, since microsoft is pushing
>   > the LSP (language server protocal).
>
> We don't have a GNU language server; what we do have is CEDET.
> So we should continue maintaining CEDET.

Do you mean that we don't have a GCC-powered language server?  Or that
we don't have a freedom respecting powered language server?  Honestly,
my knowledge of LSP is near zero.

Thanks,

Joshua

Re: Current State of CEDET in Emacs tree and standalone

[João Távora]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1109 bytes --]

On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 3:26 AM, Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> wrote:

> [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
> [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
> [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
>
>   >   I'm under the
>   > impression that semantic may not be needed, since microsoft is pushing
>   > the LSP (language server protocal).
>
> We don't have a GNU language server; what we do have is CEDET.
> So we should continue maintaining CEDET.
>

Exactly, and nothing is stopping us from building a LSP server based
on CEDET, be it in the same Emacs process where a the LSP client
is running, or in a separate one.

Any of these options (especially the second) seem interesting at first
sight.
This server could leverage the jsonrpc.el library I recently pushed into
Emacs.

If we do this, other editors, potentially freedom-denying editors
would be able to interact with said CEDET-based language server.  This is
no worse than those editors using GCC or GDB, for example.

João

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1712 bytes --]

Re: Current State of CEDET in Emacs tree and standalone

[Richard Stallman]

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

  > Exactly, and nothing is stopping us from building a LSP server based
  > on CEDET, be it in the same Emacs process where a the LSP client
  > is running, or in a separate one.

I would be very glad to see that get done.

-- 
Dr Richard Stallman
President, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)