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: Is intellisense features integration in Emacs technically possible? Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 18:04:53 +0200 Message-ID: <83eh40f1ei.fsf@gnu.org> References: <1390269670.2888.14.camel@localhost.localdomain> <83zjmpf80o.fsf@gnu.org> <83vbxcfzaa.fsf@gnu.org> <87eh40fx9j.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87wqhso7dj.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87lhy88ojq.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1390406688 10858 80.91.229.3 (22 Jan 2014 16:04:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 16:04:48 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 22 17:04:55 2014 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 1W60IR-0006ZF-03 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 22 Jan 2014 17:04:55 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35934 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W60IQ-0004nf-JQ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 22 Jan 2014 11:04:54 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45276) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W60II-0004nM-S2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Jan 2014 11:04:52 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W60IC-0008NO-Ps for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Jan 2014 11:04:46 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il ([80.179.55.166]:45616) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W60IC-0008ND-Hp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Jan 2014 11:04:40 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0MZT00K008JVWQ00@a-mtaout20.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Jan 2014 18:04:39 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0MZT00KOI8NQ8SB0@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Wed, 22 Jan 2014 18:04:39 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: <87lhy88ojq.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 X-Received-From: 80.179.55.166 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:168901 Archived-At: > From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" > Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 16:26:49 +0900 > > By comparison, it's hard to say exactly (depends on what you mean by > "display") I meant the core device-independent portions of it, which in Emacs are xdisp.c, dispnew.c, dispextern.h, composite.c, and bidi.c -- everything required for basic layout of text and redisplay. Together they weigh in at about 45KLOC. This still leaves out other parts, like fringe.c, image.c, xfaces.c, the font stuff, the menu support, and the device dependent code (*term.c, *fns.c, etc.). If I add everything together, I get about 135KLOC in the current development code (up from about 93KLOC in Emacs 21). > but XEmacs's display engine is about 3.5KLOC of C code, of > which less than 1.5KLOC are in the platform-independent parts. Not sure how you get these numbers. Just redisplay.c, redisplay.h, and redisplay-out.c are about 13KLOC. Maybe our concept of what constitutes the display engine are very different, or maybe I don't know how to count lines. As a reference point, the total number of LOC in both projects is almost identical: around 370K. Emacs has display features that XEmacs doesn't (like bidi), so I would expect the code to be smaller, but certainly not by an order of magnitude. Again, this doesn't seem to be relevant at all to the issue at hand, which is whether introducing intellisense for select languages is or isn't practically possible in Emacs development. I just brought the 2 examples of features that required a comparable, if not greater, effort, and were implemented juts recently, because there was someone who picked up the gauntlet.