Re: Renaming eglot -- or at least add an alias?

[Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>]

[[[ 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. ]]]

  > > How to deal with Eglot and Semantic is not clear to me.
  > >
  > > Is there any programming language which is supported both by Eglot and
  > > by Semantic?

  > I think this question still shows a fundamental lack of understanding
  > regarding what eglot is and does.

There is a lot I don't know, which is why I am asking question after question.

  > Eglot doens't know anything about programming languages. What languages
  > it is able to work with is determined by the available language
  > servers.

That's the pedantic way of looking on it -- in terms of implementation
details.

In the user's terms, though, in any editing session, Eglot supports
certain language and not others.  The user may not know why, but perse
sees that Eglot works for A and doesn't work for B.

  >  Some people will likely prefer a semantic based
  > workflow and others may prefer an eglot one (and yet others may prefer

It sounds like the commands for using Semantic on a file may be very
different from the commands for using Eglot on that same file.
Is that right?

It sounds like we have created a lot of complexity that it would
be better to replace with simpler, more uniform interfaces.

Is that possible in principle?

Could we have something comparable to GUD and VC to unify these parsing
facilities?




-- 
Dr Richard Stallman (https://stallman.org)
Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org)
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)