From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Thomas Lord Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: What IDE features do we need? Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 10:21:35 -0700 Message-ID: <4810C19F.5000408@emf.net> References: <87ve2ac2eo.fsf@jurta.org> <20080422115216.GA2609@muc.de> <87zlrleftm.fsf@jurta.org> <87zlrktiwf.fsf@baldur.tsdh.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------010602030503090406080308" X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1209055280 3789 80.91.229.12 (24 Apr 2008 16:41:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 16:41:20 +0000 (UTC) Cc: tassilo@member.fsf.org, Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Apr 24 18:41:54 2008 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Jp4W2-0001dN-3T for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 24 Apr 2008 18:41:46 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48145 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Jp4VM-0004ud-6g for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 24 Apr 2008 12:41:04 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Jp4Ua-0004TA-Sr for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 24 Apr 2008 12:40:17 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Jp4UY-0004Re-JP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 24 Apr 2008 12:40:16 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=48975 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Jp4UY-0004RY-Bd for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 24 Apr 2008 12:40:14 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.42inc.com ([205.149.0.25]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (SSL 3.0:RSA_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA1:24) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Jp4UU-0000DL-0R; Thu, 24 Apr 2008 12:40:10 -0400 X-TFF-CGPSA-Version: 1.5 X-TFF-CGPSA-Filter-42inc: Scanned X-42-Virus-Scanned: by 42 Antivirus -- Found to be clean. Original-Received: from [69.236.114.9] (account lord@emf.net HELO [192.168.1.64]) by mail.42inc.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.13) with ESMTPA id 28951160; Thu, 24 Apr 2008 09:39:43 -0700 User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (X11/20060808) In-Reply-To: X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:95892 Archived-At: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------010602030503090406080308 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> >> Refactoring requires a lot more infrastructure than what etags and >> ebrowse provide. >> > > I'm not convinced, but I won't argue. > The tools that people are excited about differ from etags and ebrowse by virtue of their incremental nature (updating the databases as the code is modified) and precision. The precision aspect is mainly a Java thing since the simple (enough) scoping rules and absence of syntactic abstraction make incremental parsing tractable. If you were to argue and you argued that the actual software engineering practice of refactoring and other correctness-preserving global transforms doesn't need such heavy guns, and is very well-served by more simply text based tools like Emacs has, etc: well, you'd get no argument back from me. But, afaict from watching people in various communities talk about it, Eclipse's Java features have basically /taught/ the utility of global transforms to many programmers. So many people tend to be excited about the Eclipse approach and to assume that that's how things are supposed to work. -t > > > --------------010602030503090406080308 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Eli Zaretskii wrote: 

Refactoring requires a lot more infrastructure than what etags and
ebrowse provide.
    

I'm not convinced, but I won't argue.


The tools that people are excited about differ from etags and ebrowse by virtue of their incremental nature (updating the databases as the code is modified) and precision.    The precision aspect is mainly a Java thing since the simple (enough) scoping rules and absence of syntactic abstraction make incremental parsing tractable.  

If you were to argue and you argued that the actual software engineering practice of refactoring and other correctness-preserving global transforms doesn't need such heavy guns, and is very well-served by more simply text based tools like Emacs has, etc:  well, you'd get no argument back from me.

But, afaict from watching people in various communities talk about it, Eclipse's Java features have basically taught the utility of global transforms to many programmers.   So many people tend to be excited about the Eclipse approach and to assume that that's how things are supposed to work.



-t

--------------010602030503090406080308--