Re: GUI work (was: Graphical help browser)

[Pedro L. Lucas]

> |
> | I think that Octave should have got a new function:
> | It must execute some command and this function must not be listed in
> history.
> | Example:
> | nohistory('whos') <-- Neither nohistory nor whos are listed in history.
> |
> | IDEs can use this function to do all suggested functionalities listed
> before.
>
> Are you sending these commands to Octave over stdin/stdout?

Yes, because it is a powerfull interface with Octave, and it doesn't
need change code of Octave. QtOctave needs send and read messages
from/to Octave. Example, if you are editing matrix
(http://qtoctave.wordpress.com/2007/03/13/screenshots-matrix-copy-and-paste/
), QtOctave need send changes to Octave. Also QtOctave needs read
changes of matrix from functions. And it's multi-platform (Windows or
UNIX).

Could you suggest easyer interface?

> FWIW, I think it is unfortunate that we have N different GUI/IDE
> solutions.  It would be much better to have the people who are
> interested in these things working more closely with those of us who
> are working on Octave, rather than having many half working or
> abandoned solutions floating about.

We need your help to do that. You (or all togheter) must define an
interface for IDEs.
If you don't do that, every IDE will make its own interface ==> Chaos

If I start to send patches, these patches will work only for QtOctave,
because I will define my own interface.

XML interface sounds good. Easy to use and can be used from all
programming languajes. I think thqt QtOctave can be modified to use it
and so do other IDEs.


What do you think?

2009/1/26, John W. Eaton <address@hidden>:
> On 26-Jan-2009, Pedro L. Lucas wrote:
>
> | >
> | > That being said, I think there is a case to be made for having a
> | > direct backend (e.g. function call access as in octave_server) and an
> | > IPC backend (e.g. as proposed by you for pipes or recently via DBus).
> | >
> |
> | I agree with you.
> |
> | > I recently made a list of the expected functionality of this interface
> | > 1) Set, clear, and list breakpoints (maybe extend to watchpoints when
> | > octave supports such a thing)
> | > 2) Get a command history list (possibly incremental as in
> | > octave_server?)
> | > 3) Get a list of variables in the current scope and the global scope
> | > 4) Get or set a variable's value
> | >
> |
> | I think that Octave should have got a new function:
> | It must execute some command and this function must not be listed in
> history.
> | Example:
> | nohistory('whos') <-- Neither nohistory nor whos are listed in history.
> |
> | IDEs can use this function to do all suggested functionalities listed
> before.
>
> Are you sending these commands to Octave over stdin/stdout?
>
> If you think these features would be useful to have, then I suggest
> you become involved in the development of Octave and contribute some
> patches.
>
> FWIW, I think it is unfortunate that we have N different GUI/IDE
> solutions.  It would be much better to have the people who are
> interested in these things working more closely with those of us who
> are working on Octave, rather than having many half working or
> abandoned solutions floating about.
>
> jwe
>