From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs contributions, C and Lisp Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 11:07:26 +0100 Message-ID: <87k3cf3601.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> References: <87y50z90pd.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87txbn8r6x.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <8338j717oe.fsf@gnu.org> <87zjlf6tdx.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <83sir7yue7.fsf@gnu.org> <8761o3dlak.fsf@wanadoo.es> <83bnxuzyl4.fsf@gnu.org> <871tyqes5q.fsf@wanadoo.es> <834n3lzux6.fsf@gnu.org> <87ppm9d3y4.fsf@wanadoo.es> <83ob1ty4qr.fsf@gnu.org> <87ha7lcxki.fsf@wanadoo.es> <83ios0xwcv.fsf@gnu.org> <87bnxscr0x.fsf@wanadoo.es> <83eh2oxpnw.fsf@gnu.org> <877g8gcl52.fsf@wanadoo.es> <871tyn4n1l.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <531054E2.6040200@dancol.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1393582052 19666 80.91.229.3 (28 Feb 2014 10:07:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 10:07:32 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Daniel Colascione Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Feb 28 11:07:41 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 1WJKLz-0007qA-Qw for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 11:07:39 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50173 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WJKLz-0005sL-BC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 05:07:39 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58901) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WJKLw-0005s3-J6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 05:07:37 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WJKLv-0008QF-Gs for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 05:07:36 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:57303) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WJKLv-0008Px-E5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 05:07:35 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36244 helo=lola) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WJKLv-0005NW-2Y; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 05:07:35 -0500 Original-Received: by lola (Postfix, from userid 1000) id BEEB3E082E; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 11:07:26 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <531054E2.6040200@dancol.org> (Daniel Colascione's message of "Fri, 28 Feb 2014 01:20:34 -0800") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e 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:169931 Archived-At: Daniel Colascione writes: > On 02/28/2014 01:13 AM, David Kastrup wrote: >> When one declaration changes the meaning and syntax of a program all >> over one file (and yes, this sort of thing _can_ happen with C++), >> getting things right might require a full-file parse. When presented >> with a preexisting C++ file, being able to get the actual meaning out >> by the use of exhaustive tools is nice. When _writing_ a C++ >> program, it's preferable to stay away from those edges and thus get >> along with more simplistic tools. Or even none at all. > > You might believe that --- and you may even be right --- but your > personal prescriptions for software development shouldn't affect the > feature-set of a generic editor. Ultimately, reality will affect the feature set of a generic editor. Any feature that requires per-keystroke reparsing of the entire compilation unit to work is not feasible in an editing workflow. That kind of thing is ok for code browsing, not for writing. At any rate, it was =D3scar's claim that it is so utterly absurd to state being a regular C++ programmer when one does not rely on code-explaining support tools that he basically called Eli a fraud. That's a bit stronger than "personal prescriptions for software development". --=20 David Kastrup