|
From: | Dmitry Gutov |
Subject: | Re: IDE |
Date: | Thu, 15 Oct 2015 06:40:57 +0300 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:41.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/41.0 |
On 10/14/2015 03:05 PM, Eric Ludlam wrote:
The puzzle for me here is that while the different pieces are technically independent, the more complex tasks, such as completion, depend on the other tools doing their job. Good smart completion depends on a knowledge of a project's structure to find headers (C/C++), and it also depends on rummaging around in your files to find the needed symbols.
It seems what we need is a set of "juncture points", which define how separate systems/tools should communicate. That's what xref and project.el are about, for finding locations and project information respectively; everything else in there is mostly for convenience.
There are definitely dependencies. I don't think it is over-specialized, but perhaps overly-generalized.
Could be both. But by over-specialized, I mean that a lot of stuff in e.g. ede-project doesn't make sense for many projects. targets, for example. And mailinglist/web-site-url/ftp-site?..
I'm also under impression that EDE projects are always one directory deep (and for each subdirectory, you need subprojects). Which reflects the common Makefile usage, but not how projects are structured under many other build systems.
It is possible to swap in different solutions (under the CEDET framework) but in many cases, there is currently only one solution.
Yet still, to even become pluggable, a piece of functionality has to buy into the CEDET fundamentals, like using EIEIO, mode-locals, and CEDET's base classes.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |