From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Gutov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: IDE Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2015 11:59:34 +0300 Message-ID: <5618D376.1080700@yandex.ru> References: <5610207A.2000300@harpegolden.net> <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> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1444467588 23291 80.91.229.3 (10 Oct 2015 08:59:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2015 08:59:48 +0000 (UTC) Cc: adatgyujto@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Oct 10 10:59:47 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 1Zkq0H-0002tZ-MU for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 10:59:45 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:44113 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zkq0G-0005ax-VV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 04:59:44 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42560) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zkq0D-0005aj-NV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 04:59:42 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zkq0A-0008F2-Fz for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 04:59:41 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-wi0-x231.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c05::231]:35422) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zkq0A-0008E2-75; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 04:59:38 -0400 Original-Received: by wicge5 with SMTP id ge5so96139364wic.0; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 01:59:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=eITpbUEdOXzV6n/r1s2tSLKBmiBgYiH+g0kOvnb+h98=; b=uve90Napq9YZHZ90/eIVmxoLLGKROMoFqyZTEhkmrBWtzF05z85Gub2bN5dGiN4qvV uaB8Rd6ufEvb/b5iWVD+sFm2mGRMYE3M283nCG313Ssc2z75eZEYBxmWi1RKATwEp1/T D8WJRsq37cQeTny7TBzmVVPVbnYsf55EAp1DuNoTHZfqqVB8gTeLcDtEd/VUwjajlXxa iQtp6GrPV5EdQpdVFlf4FiuXFh3o37GclDQnZKoyfsVdt2OgFFc4lxGNkOixXkAhdiCl zFGdLMU6mY1xUZUW9A/gwxtAKEEcBEmcbAWLSp/DLRXyO0T5EQSk6Fx+rHL7uB4MsoWV VbDw== X-Received: by 10.194.80.71 with SMTP id p7mr18299477wjx.83.1444467577551; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 01:59:37 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from [10.9.0.103] (nat.webazilla.com. [78.140.128.228]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id jd7sm6830436wjb.19.2015.10.10.01.59.35 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 10 Oct 2015 01:59:36 -0700 (PDT) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:41.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/41.0 In-Reply-To: <83a8rrt9ag.fsf@gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:400c:c05::231 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:191098 Archived-At: On 10/10/2015 11:30 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > I was talking about working on IDE, not on completion. And for the > most popular languages in the industry, not just for some a few niche > languages. You quoted the message that said "accurate code completion and powerful refactoring support". I can agree that the latter is barely touched (*), but it looked like you ignored the former. > Let's not reiterate past discussions: you forget CEDET. I was enumerating external programs. But sure, CEDET is a yet another option for completion. Though not too "accurate" one, if we're talking anything but C. > And if anyone _really_ cares about supporting C/C++, they should be > working with and on GCC's libcc1, which is available for quite some > time already. I wasn't aware of it. Is its API stable? Is it a good-enough replacement for libclang for the purposes of completion? If you like, I can pass along the request to use it as an alternative to the Irony and Rtags issue trackers. But some more details wouldn't hurt, it's hard for me to advocate libcc1 myself. > Instead, all we have is heated discussions and hurt feelings. That > will never get us anywhere. My feelings aren't hurt, I just meant to add more information to the discussion. > I expect to see a coherent, orchestrated effort towards having an IDE > mode in Emacs. I don't see it, certainly not in discussions on this > list. I also don't see any commits that would provide evidence of > such an effort. We definitely could have more in this department, yes. But what would you even call an "IDE mode"? A fixed multi-window setup a la ECB? I prefer to approach this problem from the bottom - like adding new commands that perform certain advanced functions. > If such activities happen somewhere else, I would suggest their > participants to come here and work with and within the core. That's... unlikely. At least, for most of them. My guess is that the mailing list interface is off-putting, but maybe we just need a better "community outreach" program, or something like that. That would be something for the new maintainer(s) to consider. > For > starters, I don't imagine they would succeed without some significant > changes and additions in the core infrastructure. The place to > discuss that is here. For refactoring, yes. But just "accurate code completion", without extras like expanding the arguments or displaying the method source, can be (and is, in certain packages) implemented though the completion-at-point-function interface, present in Emacs since 24.1. And you can have the extras using Company, which should be bundled with Emacs in the upcoming version. Or if the ELPA bundling isn't ready by then, in the version after that. > Then what exactly is the nature of your objections to my observations? > It seems we agree on the bottom line: no one works on this. The > reasons are immaterial. If anything, my view of the situation is a lot brighter than yours. I also should have more time at the end of this month to put into improving xref, which is a step, as you know, in adding a common framework for some of the IDE-ish features. (*) There are some third-party packages providing refactoring commands (for dynamic languages, mostly), but they would definitely benefit from a nice common UI.