From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard G Riley Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: code completion Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:29:52 +0100 Message-ID: References: <878x0omhmw.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <878x0o87uu.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1205371228 21753 80.91.229.12 (13 Mar 2008 01:20:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 01:20:28 +0000 (UTC) Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org To: Bastien Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Mar 13 02:20:56 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JZc7q-0000qL-7s for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 02:20:54 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JZc7H-0000d9-7b for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 21:20:19 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JZQ5q-00021f-9W for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 08:30:02 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JZQ5o-0001zl-Oh for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 08:30:01 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JZQ5o-0001za-4u for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 08:30:00 -0400 Original-Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.185]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JZQ5n-0002aX-JY for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 08:30:00 -0400 Original-Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id f5so1082394nfh.26 for ; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 05:29:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version:content-type:from; bh=2xO9H8RDt2T6RpxzlJ7qMaQkiJ1hXkDlrG16zn00HHo=; b=Nyp7GNORrmWWHwwIYDMY0esvP8O9Lin+3NPai1LyY5Va3KkRZ30f/KHA84ulHt8FPJNswJsPvqmWPvmuLZT/EPMtrCf8zKZajTwsGf+X4/YqqIIgl0wjs3/RmhWEMmB/7XjBrzfy3QSp2Zw0sWQcU60NQhdARwCcLLvolFIzgGI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version:content-type:from; b=H94A8LcIk3NBxopbEdhk5e5GpKL9WJ8/NYu/KgbA7YvLeHQeIhF5VIRmB78TFWJX1uIfQL5hqZtW+Lt6ayyTh0UMZuIkfxKqdbGHWIfIzLLtiFC+U8qU3kvE7YsU8ddjCS2bYbel4LuD3keYbdZef0eZ9VzXZjVQISXYtDCwXdE= Original-Received: by 10.78.129.16 with SMTP id b16mr21659684hud.34.1205324997862; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 05:29:57 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from localhost ( [85.179.193.254]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id t10sm15172577muh.13.2008.03.12.05.29.53 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 12 Mar 2008 05:29:55 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <878x0o87uu.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> (Bastien's message of "Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:06:17 +0000") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110007 (No Gnus v0.7) Emacs/22.1 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 21:17:33 -0400 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:52342 Archived-At: Bastien writes: > Richard G Riley writes: > >> However, it would be wrong to say all is flowers and sunshine. It is not >> and an honest answer (from my perspective) is more respectful at times. > > If someone requests improvements for a feature in Emacs (e.g. code > refactoring) it is honest to tell about the shortcomings of its current > implementation. It is depressing to recommand the OP to have a look > at It is also honest to state ones opinion as to the current state. And I have requoted my original statements below in case they are further misrepresented however unintentionally. > other editors, not because it is dishonest, but because such an advice > won't help make the Emacs implementation better. And neither will "come on in, it all works perfectly." > > And the more constructive way is to give directions on how to help > improving the feature. I agree. What makes you think this has not happened? I get the feeling you take my words as some sort of attack? They are not and I am mildly surprised at your reaction here. Possibly a late night maintaining the (excellent) org-mode? :-; In addition, not every programmer has the luxury of the time needed to negotiate new or fixed features in a tool he needs working yesterday. These things take a lot of familiarisation and effort. > > Imagine this: you create a new tool (say bzr) that aims at being better > than others (say CVS, RCS) wrt some features. When you start coding the > tool, it is still behind the other ones. Now imagine that someone likes > your tool and asks about a feature. What if someone else recommends the > OP to switch to another tool, just because your tool (the one he uses) > doesn't have this feature ? He didn't ask about a specific tool. He asked about code completion. This could be one of many things in emacs. I mentioned semantic. What is your experience of code completion? Have you used CEDET and ecb etc? As for suggesting the op switches to another tool, I would remind you of what I actually said (including redirecting him to the semantic mailing list): ,---- | It's a commonly asked question and frequently goes without an answer. I | tried semantic but couldn't really get it to work. You might ask on | their mailing list as I think thats the only route. I have a nasty | feeling that using emacs as a C/C++ IDE might be coming to the end of | the road as it falls behind in many of the features (code completion, | refactoring for an example) that more modern IDEs like Eclipse | provides. The maintainer of ecb as good as said the same. A shame. `---- What parts of this are wrong or misleading? As i stated, the ecb developer HIMSELF has voiced his concerns at emacs falling behind too. > > I guess you woudn't find this constructive... I don't really know what you are getting at. I have worked a fair bit with these tools and given constructive feedback when necessary. As well as numerous other tools. You seem to take my honest opinion on the status of emacs code completion as some sort of attack on the editor itself and the tools. It is not. It is an honest opinion on its suitability and its ability to compete with other tools for a professional C/C++ programmer. The bottom line is that where emacs excels in some places, it is lagging in others. Not all of us have the time or the ability to "do it ourselves" and sometimes it saves people a lot of time and hassle to forewarn them of possible pitfalls. Using emacs is an obsession with some of us. I still do ALL my coding in emacs. Why? Because the positives outweigh the negatives. And believe me, org-mode is one of the better positives as is the wonderful nxhtml from Lennart. YASnippets is cool too.