From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "John Wiegley" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: IDE Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 15:58:57 -0700 Organization: New Artisans LLC Message-ID: 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> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1445036371 12408 80.91.229.3 (16 Oct 2015 22:59:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 22:59:31 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Oct 17 00:59:16 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 1ZnDxu-0007aN-AB for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 00:59:10 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56213 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZnDxt-00036g-M0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 18:59:09 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57647) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZnDxq-00036Y-3C for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 18:59:06 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZnDxn-0007Ln-9k for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 18:59:06 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-pa0-x229.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400e:c03::229]:36123) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZnDxn-0007Li-4F for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 18:59:03 -0400 Original-Received: by pacfv9 with SMTP id fv9so34750929pac.3 for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 15:59:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:date:organization:message-id :references:user-agent:mail-followup-to:mime-version:content-type; bh=+5c/qoOKHh4ecQ29QZUXlLaJAyVbFVbUAqXN8Fyt2iE=; b=WcNe3LqSlIbyL4lAVdbBtqBBoArb/i5fdy+ch32eBzAoEJ2l4hks/z9aFVE90xCPzZ vvtmo5yC018xmVx6kEfxSs5/sqV78JTiWbIVrpwf4zjOJSP15cv6rDt4V52hvuATZQbZ iBtlVKM8G+AcV1866RXwzGF6RGXFHGtVgVJRKeuG9921rw7umfuoIWxOQV2eIsaD+G// URABJBauLoA28Q6HIvN9FVtDxr8DGgGV5N0cyBGqWzXL3g3j4KoxI79B73LT0i2UJOw5 8clCxBvjC323WSz5CZjHZZyW9xH07dd81XOBSTwYzPSYF9Xk7xNcj4u3KzhoXnW6BOWM PmpA== X-Received: by 10.66.160.34 with SMTP id xh2mr19773408pab.67.1445036342630; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 15:59:02 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from Hermes-2.local (99-121-201-99.lightspeed.frokca.sbcglobal.net. [99.121.201.99]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id xu5sm23237758pab.12.2015.10.16.15.59.00 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 16 Oct 2015 15:59:01 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by Hermes-2.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id DB23947842D8; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 15:58:59 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <561E32D2.4060501@yandex.ru> (Dmitry Gutov's message of "Wed, 14 Oct 2015 13:47:46 +0300") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (darwin) Mail-Followup-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:400e:c03::229 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:191798 Archived-At: >>>>> 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. If, later in our design discussions, CEDET has experiences, code, and perspectives to offer, this could be of tremendous value. I hope Eric will be avail of us his time then, and share those nuggets with us. John