* Current State of CEDET in Emacs tree and standalone
@ 2018-07-10 13:09 Andreas Marschke
2018-07-10 13:42 ` Noam Postavsky
2018-07-19 14:48 ` Joshua Branson
0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Andreas Marschke @ 2018-07-10 13:09 UTC (permalink / raw
To: emacs-devel, cedet-semantic
[-- 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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Current State of CEDET in Emacs tree and standalone
2018-07-10 13:09 Current State of CEDET in Emacs tree and standalone Andreas Marschke
@ 2018-07-10 13:42 ` Noam Postavsky
2018-07-19 14:48 ` Joshua Branson
1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Noam Postavsky @ 2018-07-10 13:42 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Andreas Marschke; +Cc: cedet-semantic, Emacs developers
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Current State of CEDET in Emacs tree and standalone
2018-07-10 13:09 Current State of CEDET in Emacs tree and standalone Andreas Marschke
2018-07-10 13:42 ` Noam Postavsky
@ 2018-07-19 14:48 ` Joshua Branson
2018-07-19 20:58 ` Andreas Marschke
2018-07-20 2:26 ` Richard Stallman
1 sibling, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Joshua Branson @ 2018-07-19 14:48 UTC (permalink / raw
To: emacs-devel
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Current State of CEDET in Emacs tree and standalone
2018-07-19 14:48 ` Joshua Branson
@ 2018-07-19 20:58 ` Andreas Marschke
2018-07-20 15:38 ` Joshua Branson
2018-07-20 2:26 ` Richard Stallman
1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Andreas Marschke @ 2018-07-19 20:58 UTC (permalink / raw
To: jbranso; +Cc: emacs-devel
[-- 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 --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Current State of CEDET in Emacs tree and standalone
2018-07-19 14:48 ` Joshua Branson
2018-07-19 20:58 ` Andreas Marschke
@ 2018-07-20 2:26 ` Richard Stallman
2018-07-20 15:40 ` Joshua Branson
2018-07-20 16:12 ` João Távora
1 sibling, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Richard Stallman @ 2018-07-20 2:26 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Joshua Branson; +Cc: emacs-devel
[[[ 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)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Current State of CEDET in Emacs tree and standalone
2018-07-19 20:58 ` Andreas Marschke
@ 2018-07-20 15:38 ` Joshua Branson
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Joshua Branson @ 2018-07-20 15:38 UTC (permalink / raw
To: emacs-devel
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Current State of CEDET in Emacs tree and standalone
2018-07-20 2:26 ` Richard Stallman
@ 2018-07-20 15:40 ` Joshua Branson
2018-07-20 16:12 ` João Távora
1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Joshua Branson @ 2018-07-20 15:40 UTC (permalink / raw
To: emacs-devel
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Current State of CEDET in Emacs tree and standalone
2018-07-20 2:26 ` Richard Stallman
2018-07-20 15:40 ` Joshua Branson
@ 2018-07-20 16:12 ` João Távora
2018-07-22 2:14 ` Richard Stallman
1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: João Távora @ 2018-07-20 16:12 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Richard Stallman; +Cc: Joshua Branson, emacs-devel
[-- 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 --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Current State of CEDET in Emacs tree and standalone
2018-07-20 16:12 ` João Távora
@ 2018-07-22 2:14 ` Richard Stallman
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Richard Stallman @ 2018-07-22 2:14 UTC (permalink / raw
To: João Távora; +Cc: jbranso, emacs-devel
[[[ 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)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2018-07-22 2:14 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2018-07-10 13:09 Current State of CEDET in Emacs tree and standalone Andreas Marschke
2018-07-10 13:42 ` Noam Postavsky
2018-07-19 14:48 ` Joshua Branson
2018-07-19 20:58 ` Andreas Marschke
2018-07-20 15:38 ` Joshua Branson
2018-07-20 2:26 ` Richard Stallman
2018-07-20 15:40 ` Joshua Branson
2018-07-20 16:12 ` João Távora
2018-07-22 2:14 ` Richard Stallman
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this external index
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.