Re: Emacs contributions, C and Lisp

[John Yates]

Daivd,

On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 4:49 PM, David Engster <address@hidden> wrote:

Where did I say that clang cannot do that [refactor C++]?

Please forgive me if I mis-interpreted what you wrote.  Just like Oscar I have tremendous respect for your contributions to Emacs and CEDET.

I was responding to this paragraph:

> CEDET will most probably never be able to refactor C++ code, aside from
> very simple cases. There are very few IDEs out there which even try to
> do that; from my experience, none of them do it 100% reliably (just
> bring some meta template programming into the game and see what

> happens). IMHO, "Refactoring C++" should not be in the job description.

To me that sounded like you were dismissing all attempts across all IDEs to implement "Refactoring C++".  Perhaps on re-reading what you meant was that 100% reliable refactoring of C++ should not be a CEDET goal.  Was that what you meant?  Or was it still something else?

I did say that if you will accept nothing less than perfection, then by
all means implement your clang-based silver bullet.

Do you foresee a future in which Emacs + ELPA will offer "lead bullet" level C++ refactoring?

/john