[Caml-list] IDE like PyCharm

[Caml-list] IDE like PyCharm

[Allan Wegan]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 793 bytes --]

I am new to OCaml and wonder, whether there exists any noob-friendly
X-based IDE that is at least a bit like PyCharm. Termianl-based editors
and IDEs proved to be cumbersome and too shortcut-heavy in the past.
Has anyone seen such a beast?

I come from Python in need of more performance and already wrote some
tens of lines of code feeling that this language might be exactly what i
need to write the more performance-critical parts in (don't like C/C++).



-- 
Allan Wegan
<http://www.allanwegan.de/>
Jabber: allanwegan@ffnord.net
 OTR-Fingerprint: E4DCAA40 4859428E B3912896 F2498604 8CAA126F
Jabber: allanwegan@jabber.ccc.de
 OTR-Fingerprint: A1AAA1B9 C067F988 4A424D33 98343469 29164587
ICQ: 209459114
 OTR-Fingerprint: 71DE5B5E 67D6D758 A93BF1CE 7DA06625 205AC6EC


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

Re: [Caml-list] IDE like PyCharm

[Francois Berenger]

On 05/09/2016 12:19 AM, Allan Wegan wrote:
> I am new to OCaml and wonder, whether there exists any noob-friendly
> X-based IDE that is at least a bit like PyCharm. Termianl-based editors
> and IDEs proved to be cumbersome and too shortcut-heavy in the past.
> Has anyone seen such a beast?

Cf. this thread:

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/14747939/ide-for-ocaml-language

Personally, I feel emacs is the best supported environment for
OCaml programming.

> I come from Python in need of more performance and already wrote some
> tens of lines of code feeling that this language might be exactly what i
> need to write the more performance-critical parts in (don't like C/C++).

-- 
Regards,
Francois.
"When in doubt, use more types"

Re: [Caml-list] IDE like PyCharm

[vrotaru.md]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1469 bytes --]

You may try Atom editor with Nuclide extension (developed at Facebook for
internal uses, as I understand).
I also recommend the ocaml-indent and build extensions.

As soon as you have opam and atom installed it's as simple as:

$ opam install merlin ocamlbuild ocp-indent
$ apm install nuclide language-ocaml ocaml-indent build


În lun., 9 mai 2016 la 11:08, Francois Berenger <francois.berenger@inria.fr>
a scris:

> On 05/09/2016 12:19 AM, Allan Wegan wrote:
> > I am new to OCaml and wonder, whether there exists any noob-friendly
> > X-based IDE that is at least a bit like PyCharm. Termianl-based editors
> > and IDEs proved to be cumbersome and too shortcut-heavy in the past.
> > Has anyone seen such a beast?
>
> Cf. this thread:
>
> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/14747939/ide-for-ocaml-language
>
> Personally, I feel emacs is the best supported environment for
> OCaml programming.
>
> > I come from Python in need of more performance and already wrote some
> > tens of lines of code feeling that this language might be exactly what i
> > need to write the more performance-critical parts in (don't like C/C++).
>
> --
> Regards,
> Francois.
> "When in doubt, use more types"
>
> --
> Caml-list mailing list.  Subscription management and archives:
> https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list
> Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
> Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2261 bytes --]

Re: [Caml-list] IDE like PyCharm

[Jean-Marc Alliot]

Le 09/05/2016 à 10:08, Francois Berenger a écrit :
> On 05/09/2016 12:19 AM, Allan Wegan wrote:
>> I am new to OCaml and wonder, whether there exists any noob-friendly
>> X-based IDE that is at least a bit like PyCharm. Termianl-based editors
>> and IDEs proved to be cumbersome and too shortcut-heavy in the past.
>> Has anyone seen such a beast?
>
>
>
> Personally, I feel emacs is the best supported environment for
> OCaml programming. 

Agreed.
I have been using Merlin
https://github.com/the-lambda-church/merlin/wiki/emacs-from-scratch
inside emacs and found it a worthwhile addition.

Jean-Marc

Re: [Caml-list] IDE like PyCharm

[Ivan Gotovchits]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1386 bytes --]

On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 6:19 PM, Allan Wegan <allanwegan@allanwegan.de>
wrote:

> I am new to OCaml and wonder, whether there exists any noob-friendly
> X-based IDE that is at least a bit like PyCharm. Termianl-based editors
> and IDEs proved to be cumbersome and too shortcut-heavy in the past.
> Has anyone seen such a beast?
>

Sure we have! OCaml-top [1] is very newbie friendly and work out of box,
ideal for
the first steps. Even a faster way to start is to try OCaml in your web
browser [2].
Once you feel yourself more comfortable in the language, you should
consider to switch
to emacs, vim or sublime. They all have a nice integration with OCaml,
including intellisense
like completion, code and doc lookup and incremental typechecking.

[1]: https://www.typerex.org/ocaml-top.html
[2]: https://try.ocamlpro.com/


>
> I come from Python in need of more performance and already wrote some
> tens of lines of code feeling that this language might be exactly what i
> need to write the more performance-critical parts in (don't like C/C++).
>
>
>
> --
> Allan Wegan
> <http://www.allanwegan.de/>
> Jabber: allanwegan@ffnord.net
>  OTR-Fingerprint: E4DCAA40 4859428E B3912896 F2498604 8CAA126F
> Jabber: allanwegan@jabber.ccc.de
>  OTR-Fingerprint: A1AAA1B9 C067F988 4A424D33 98343469 29164587
> ICQ: 209459114
>  OTR-Fingerprint: 71DE5B5E 67D6D758 A93BF1CE 7DA06625 205AC6EC
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2434 bytes --]

Re: [Caml-list] IDE like PyCharm - Results

[Allan Wegan]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1925 bytes --]

I checked the results of this thread and from my point of view, that are
the results:

emacs:
Already got two operating systems to use and don't want to learn another
one. I know, you all *love* this beast. But i have used Windows for a
long time before i switched to Gentoo. I just can't live without a
usable GUI anymore.

Atom editor with Nuclide extension:
$ opam install merlin ocamlbuild ocp-indent
-> installed some stuff
$ apm install nuclide language-ocaml ocaml-indent build
-> "bash: apm: command not found"

OCaml-top:
Single file solution - not really an IDE but still better than Scite
(that i used until now) - so i tried to use that...
...but it failed with complaining about missing lablgtk2 (wich
definitely is installed) on executing ocp-build to build it.

https://try.ocamlpro.com/:
Nice tutorial and will use it - but it is not an IDE.

OcaIDE:
Looks dead and installing Eclipse would probably lead to nightmares.

OCamlEditor:
Looks good and i surely want to use it...
...but it failed with complaining about missing lablgtk2 (wich
definitely is installed) on executing "ocaml build.ml ocamleditor" to
build it.


I think i somehow got into build environment hell. Is there any
*working* tutorial about how to properly set up the build environment
for OCamlEditor and/or OCaml-top?

I am also interested in other type-inferring (i love that concept)
statically typed functional non-lazy-evaluation (no Haskell please)
compiled languages - preferably one with a mature eco system (now that i
have experienced how important that is).



-- 
Allan Wegan
<http://www.allanwegan.de/>
Jabber: allanwegan@ffnord.net
 OTR-Fingerprint: E4DCAA40 4859428E B3912896 F2498604 8CAA126F
Jabber: allanwegan@jabber.ccc.de
 OTR-Fingerprint: A1AAA1B9 C067F988 4A424D33 98343469 29164587
ICQ: 209459114
 OTR-Fingerprint: 71DE5B5E 67D6D758 A93BF1CE 7DA06625 205AC6EC


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

Re: [Caml-list] IDE like PyCharm - Results

[Benjamin Greenman]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2190 bytes --]

You might like Sublime Text <https://www.sublimetext.com/> with whitequark's
<https://github.com/whitequark/sublime-better-ocaml> extensions

On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Allan Wegan <allanwegan@allanwegan.de>
wrote:

> I checked the results of this thread and from my point of view, that are
> the results:
>
> emacs:
> Already got two operating systems to use and don't want to learn another
> one. I know, you all *love* this beast. But i have used Windows for a
> long time before i switched to Gentoo. I just can't live without a
> usable GUI anymore.
>
> Atom editor with Nuclide extension:
> $ opam install merlin ocamlbuild ocp-indent
> -> installed some stuff
> $ apm install nuclide language-ocaml ocaml-indent build
> -> "bash: apm: command not found"
>
> OCaml-top:
> Single file solution - not really an IDE but still better than Scite
> (that i used until now) - so i tried to use that...
> ...but it failed with complaining about missing lablgtk2 (wich
> definitely is installed) on executing ocp-build to build it.
>
> https://try.ocamlpro.com/:
> Nice tutorial and will use it - but it is not an IDE.
>
> OcaIDE:
> Looks dead and installing Eclipse would probably lead to nightmares.
>
> OCamlEditor:
> Looks good and i surely want to use it...
> ...but it failed with complaining about missing lablgtk2 (wich
> definitely is installed) on executing "ocaml build.ml ocamleditor" to
> build it.
>
>
> I think i somehow got into build environment hell. Is there any
> *working* tutorial about how to properly set up the build environment
> for OCamlEditor and/or OCaml-top?
>
> I am also interested in other type-inferring (i love that concept)
> statically typed functional non-lazy-evaluation (no Haskell please)
> compiled languages - preferably one with a mature eco system (now that i
> have experienced how important that is).
>
>
>
> --
> Allan Wegan
> <http://www.allanwegan.de/>
> Jabber: allanwegan@ffnord.net
>  OTR-Fingerprint: E4DCAA40 4859428E B3912896 F2498604 8CAA126F
> Jabber: allanwegan@jabber.ccc.de
>  OTR-Fingerprint: A1AAA1B9 C067F988 4A424D33 98343469 29164587
> ICQ: 209459114
>  OTR-Fingerprint: 71DE5B5E 67D6D758 A93BF1CE 7DA06625 205AC6EC
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3091 bytes --]

Re: [Caml-list] IDE like PyCharm - Results

[Allan Wegan]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 805 bytes --]

> You might like Sublime Text <https://www.sublimetext.com/> with
> whitequark's <https://github.com/whitequark/sublime-better-ocaml>
> extensions

Wow - great IDE and easy to install (just extract and chmod executables)
too. I really love its unique content overview in the right column.

I guess i still need to learn how making multifile projects works in the
OCaml world - so i can integrate it in this shiny new IDE (it seems to
support custom build workflows).



-- 
Allan Wegan
<http://www.allanwegan.de/>
Jabber: allanwegan@ffnord.net
 OTR-Fingerprint: E4DCAA40 4859428E B3912896 F2498604 8CAA126F
Jabber: allanwegan@jabber.ccc.de
 OTR-Fingerprint: A1AAA1B9 C067F988 4A424D33 98343469 29164587
ICQ: 209459114
 OTR-Fingerprint: 71DE5B5E 67D6D758 A93BF1CE 7DA06625 205AC6EC


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

Re: [Caml-list] IDE like PyCharm - Results

[Vu Ngoc San]

Le 11/05/2016 01:16, Allan Wegan a écrit :
>> You might like Sublime Text <https://www.sublimetext.com/> with
>> whitequark's <https://github.com/whitequark/sublime-better-ocaml>
>> extensions
> Wow - great IDE and easy to install (just extract and chmod executables)
> too. I really love its unique content overview in the right column.

I know it's quite difficult to convince someone to switch to emacs -- 
because the initial slope is strong --
but in case you want to try, you may have a look a these:

http://emacsrocks.com/e13.html
https://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/MiniMap

Best wishes
San

Re: [Caml-list] IDE like PyCharm - Results

[Bahman Movaqar]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2544 bytes --]

On 05/11/2016 01:34 AM, Allan Wegan wrote:
> emacs:
> Already got two operating systems to use and don't want to learn another
> one. I know, you all *love* this beast. But i have used Windows for a
> long time before i switched to Gentoo. I just can't live without a
> usable GUI anymore.

I feel for you.  I've been there when I started my Lisp/Scheme journey.
 But once I got the hang of it, I never looked back :-)

> Atom editor with Nuclide extension:

I heard about Atom in this very thread for the first time. I gave it a
try and it was a, surprisingly, smooth experience. Everything worked out
of the box[1]. Some of Merlin's functionalities (like jumping to
interface/impl or declaration) are missing but one could live with it, I
suppose.

> $ opam install merlin ocamlbuild ocp-indent
> -> installed some stuff
> $ apm install nuclide language-ocaml ocaml-indent build
> -> "bash: apm: command not found"

This, I'm certain, is an OS specific problem as on Ubuntu 14.04, here,
it went all fine.  I'd suggest you try Atom installation again since the
editor, IMO, seems to be worth it.

> I think i somehow got into build environment hell. Is there any
> *working* tutorial about how to properly set up the build environment
> for OCamlEditor and/or OCaml-top?

I, personally, wouldn't call it build env hell.  Since you're trying to
swim in a different direction that the current's (vim & Emacs), you
can't expect much material to be found.

> I am also interested in other type-inferring (i love that concept)
> statically typed functional non-lazy-evaluation (no Haskell please)
> compiled languages - preferably one with a mature eco system (now that i
> have experienced how important that is).

I'd daresay OCaml is the best bet[2]; clean simple language with an
ecosystem created by no "social coders" with (generally) no half-assed
packages.  You might like to try Scala (if you're friends with JVM); it
has borrowed so many ideas from ML family --and only then you'll get my
comment on the community :-)

[1] Just remember, if you use OPAM, run Atom from terminal so that it
picks up OPAM's environment changes.
[2] I'm mostly an OCaml beginner but I've had the chance to learn and
code in many languages.  As a result, I've seen many different
communities and different code qualities.

-- 
Bahman Movaqar

http://BahmanM.com - https://twitter.com/bahman__m
https://github.com/bahmanm - https://gist.github.com/bahmanm
PGP Key ID: 0x6AB5BD68 (keyserver2.pgp.com)


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

Re: [Caml-list] IDE like PyCharm - Results

[Allan Wegan]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3203 bytes --]

>> emacs:
>> Already got two operating systems to use and don't want to learn
>> another one. I know, you all *love* this beast. But i have used
>> Windows for a long time before i switched to Gentoo. I just can't
>> live without a usable GUI anymore.
>
> I feel for you.  I've been there when I started my Lisp/Scheme
> journey. But once I got the hang of it, I never looked back :-)

Yeah - ya guys see everything after the punch cards as unneded eye candy
anyway :P

>> $ opam install merlin ocamlbuild ocp-indent
>> -> installed some stuff
>> $ apm install nuclide language-ocaml ocaml-indent build
>> -> "bash: apm: command not found"
>
> This, I'm certain, is an OS specific problem as on Ubuntu 14.04, here,
> it went all fine.  I'd suggest you try Atom installation again since
> the editor, IMO, seems to be worth it.

It surely is an OS-specific thing - because it is a build environment
thing. People tend to assume that everyone out there will have the same
OS they have and therefore do not even think about giving more detailed
instructions. That assumption is the most nasty FLOSS-world-specific
thing i experienced so far.
But i may try again as i get more experienced with the OCaml build
system. I think there may be some Atom dependencies missing on my system
because on Gentoo there is only installed what you explicitly installed.
The real pain always is finding out what is missing and how to get it...

> I, personally, wouldn't call it build env hell.  Since you're trying
> to swim in a different direction that the current's (vim & Emacs), you
> can't expect much material to be found.

Vim and Emacs are commandline editors - we got 2016 and IDEs for other
languages evolved to be GUI-driven out there.
If you want to know how an IDE looks like when it is done "right" - look
at Microsoft's Visual Studio. They do not often do things right but that
thing is the greatest IDE i've seen (and with todays CPUs and RAM it
even became fast *g*). Too bad they did their own .Net-based functional
language instead of adopting OCaml...

> I'd daresay OCaml is the best bet[2]; clean simple language with an
> ecosystem created by no "social coders" with (generally) no half-assed
> packages.

That is why i am here. Well, can't say a lot about the packages and do
not know what a social coder is (sounds like the opposite of antisocial)
- but type inference, functional paradigm, generic algebraic types, type
safety, memory safety and much better performance than Python is what i
want and OCaml seems to provide that.
Would also like dependent types and an all-inclusive standard library -
but you can't have it all i guess.
I mostly want to use OCaml for building libraries to be used from
Python. So in principle the lack of a feature-complete standard library
is not that much an issue for me.



-- 
Allan Wegan
<http://www.allanwegan.de/>
Jabber: allanwegan@ffnord.net
 OTR-Fingerprint: E4DCAA40 4859428E B3912896 F2498604 8CAA126F
Jabber: allanwegan@jabber.ccc.de
 OTR-Fingerprint: A1AAA1B9 C067F988 4A424D33 98343469 29164587
ICQ: 209459114
 OTR-Fingerprint: 71DE5B5E 67D6D758 A93BF1CE 7DA06625 205AC6EC


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

RE: [Caml-list] IDE like PyCharm - Results

[David Allsopp]

Allan Wegan wrote:
> >> emacs:
> >> Already got two operating systems to use and don't want to learn
> >> another one. I know, you all *love* this beast. But i have used
> >> Windows for a long time before i switched to Gentoo. I just can't
> >> live without a usable GUI anymore.
> >
> > I feel for you.  I've been there when I started my Lisp/Scheme
> > journey. But once I got the hang of it, I never looked back :-)
> 
> Yeah - ya guys see everything after the punch cards as unneded eye candy
> anyway :P
>
> >> $ opam install merlin ocamlbuild ocp-indent
> >> -> installed some stuff
> >> $ apm install nuclide language-ocaml ocaml-indent build
> >> -> "bash: apm: command not found"
> >
> > This, I'm certain, is an OS specific problem as on Ubuntu 14.04, here,
> > it went all fine.  I'd suggest you try Atom installation again since
> > the editor, IMO, seems to be worth it.
> 
> It surely is an OS-specific thing - because it is a build environment
> thing.

It's a build environment thing because you insist on using a package manager which is a build environment!

> People tend to assume that everyone out there will have the same OS
> they have and therefore do not even think about giving more detailed
> instructions.

There were more detailed instructions; you chose to snip the line:

> As soon as you have opam and atom installed it's as simple as:

If bash is telling you that apm isn't found, it probably means you've failed to install atom on your OS. If you're struggling to do that, you could:

a) Actually ask a question about how to do this (possibly, but not necessarily, on a more applicable list), instead of insulting the OP
b) Use a more popular OS, and see if the instructions are easier to find
c) Temporarily virtualise a more popular OS in order to try it out, and then return to installing it to your more niche OS if you're happy with it

<snip rant>

> > I, personally, wouldn't call it build env hell.  Since you're trying
> > to swim in a different direction that the current's (vim & Emacs), you
> > can't expect much material to be found.
> 
> Vim and Emacs are commandline editors - we got 2016 and IDEs for other
> languages evolved to be GUI-driven out there.

Actually, IDEs for other languages evolved to be GUIs more than 20 years ago, having recently had the "pleasure" of reinstalling Microsoft Visual C++ 4. So calling Vim and Emacs users dated may not be a route to getting advice (belligerent maybe...)

> If you want to know how an IDE looks like when it is done "right" - look
> at Microsoft's Visual Studio. They do not often do things right but that
> thing is the greatest IDE i've seen (and with todays CPUs and RAM it even
> became fast *g*).

If you'd like to whip up some funds for a port, I'm sure the community would be grateful. You are a priori assuming that all of us Vim and Emacs users have never seen or used Visual Studio (or Eclipse before). A better tack might be to name a feature of your favourite GUI IDE which you perceive as lacking in our terribly dated "command line" editors (I personally regard gVim as a GUI editor, the clue being in the 'g'). There's a chance it's on a wish-list; there's a chance there's a perfectly reasonable other way...

> Too bad they did their own .Net-based functional
> language instead of adopting OCaml...

Although they did use OCaml as a starting point for that language.


David

Re: [Caml-list] IDE like PyCharm - Results

[vrotaru.md]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4240 bytes --]

About that failing 'apm install.. ' thing

My totally haphazard guess that apm is just an shell script invoking atom
with some special parameters. So some thing may have get wrong. Anyway you
do not need it. It is just convenient. All those packages can be installed
from inside atom




În mie., 11 mai 2016 la 09:17, David Allsopp <dra-news@metastack.com> a
scris:

> Allan Wegan wrote:
> > >> emacs:
> > >> Already got two operating systems to use and don't want to learn
> > >> another one. I know, you all *love* this beast. But i have used
> > >> Windows for a long time before i switched to Gentoo. I just can't
> > >> live without a usable GUI anymore.
> > >
> > > I feel for you.  I've been there when I started my Lisp/Scheme
> > > journey. But once I got the hang of it, I never looked back :-)
> >
> > Yeah - ya guys see everything after the punch cards as unneded eye candy
> > anyway :P
> >
> > >> $ opam install merlin ocamlbuild ocp-indent
> > >> -> installed some stuff
> > >> $ apm install nuclide language-ocaml ocaml-indent build
> > >> -> "bash: apm: command not found"
> > >
> > > This, I'm certain, is an OS specific problem as on Ubuntu 14.04, here,
> > > it went all fine.  I'd suggest you try Atom installation again since
> > > the editor, IMO, seems to be worth it.
> >
> > It surely is an OS-specific thing - because it is a build environment
> > thing.
>
> It's a build environment thing because you insist on using a package
> manager which is a build environment!
>
> > People tend to assume that everyone out there will have the same OS
> > they have and therefore do not even think about giving more detailed
> > instructions.
>
> There were more detailed instructions; you chose to snip the line:
>
> > As soon as you have opam and atom installed it's as simple as:
>
> If bash is telling you that apm isn't found, it probably means you've
> failed to install atom on your OS. If you're struggling to do that, you
> could:
>
> a) Actually ask a question about how to do this (possibly, but not
> necessarily, on a more applicable list), instead of insulting the OP
> b) Use a more popular OS, and see if the instructions are easier to find
> c) Temporarily virtualise a more popular OS in order to try it out, and
> then return to installing it to your more niche OS if you're happy with it
>
> <snip rant>
>
> > > I, personally, wouldn't call it build env hell.  Since you're trying
> > > to swim in a different direction that the current's (vim & Emacs), you
> > > can't expect much material to be found.
> >
> > Vim and Emacs are commandline editors - we got 2016 and IDEs for other
> > languages evolved to be GUI-driven out there.
>
> Actually, IDEs for other languages evolved to be GUIs more than 20 years
> ago, having recently had the "pleasure" of reinstalling Microsoft Visual
> C++ 4. So calling Vim and Emacs users dated may not be a route to getting
> advice (belligerent maybe...)
>
> > If you want to know how an IDE looks like when it is done "right" - look
> > at Microsoft's Visual Studio. They do not often do things right but that
> > thing is the greatest IDE i've seen (and with todays CPUs and RAM it even
> > became fast *g*).
>
> If you'd like to whip up some funds for a port, I'm sure the community
> would be grateful. You are a priori assuming that all of us Vim and Emacs
> users have never seen or used Visual Studio (or Eclipse before). A better
> tack might be to name a feature of your favourite GUI IDE which you
> perceive as lacking in our terribly dated "command line" editors (I
> personally regard gVim as a GUI editor, the clue being in the 'g'). There's
> a chance it's on a wish-list; there's a chance there's a perfectly
> reasonable other way...
>
> > Too bad they did their own .Net-based functional
> > language instead of adopting OCaml...
>
> Although they did use OCaml as a starting point for that language.
>
>
> David
>
> --
> Caml-list mailing list.  Subscription management and archives:
> https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list
> Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
> Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5284 bytes --]

Re: [Caml-list] IDE like PyCharm - Results

[Allan Wegan]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4517 bytes --]

<snip rant>

>> Vim and Emacs are commandline editors - we got 2016 and IDEs for
>> other languages evolved to be GUI-driven out there.
>
> Actually, IDEs for other languages evolved to be GUIs more than 20
> years ago, having recently had the "pleasure" of reinstalling
> Microsoft Visual C++ 4.

> So calling Vim and Emacs users dated may not be a route to getting
> advice (belligerent maybe...)

So i should not call Emacs outdated because that is too much an
understatement? English is not my first language - would "archaic" be
more appropriate?

By the way i did not even called the users outdated - just the IDE.
Using outdated stuff is very popular by the youngsters where i live. We
call them hipsters - and they call it vintage. Nothing wrong with that.
I am not against using old Vectrex consoles and Emacs - i just do not
use it myself. And i really try to ensure, that everyone who did not get
the message the first time will have an increasing chance to get it in
each iteration of the
use-Emacs-its-great--nope-want-a-GUI-driven-solution cycle. That
drastically increases the possibility, that even the one without any
reading skill will get it at some point. He will sudeenly realize, that
i am obviously not interested in using Emacs and therefore trying to
advertise it again and again is just a waste of time.

In hindsight i think i should have started with a flamewar against Emacs
- that would have gotten the message around much faster. But i don't
even hate Emacs - i just don't want to use it and therefore will not use it.

And regarding getting advice - i got it from both - Emacs users and
non-Emacs users. I am actually pretty satisfied as i also got results my
internet search did not uncover. Sublime is really good. And OCamlEditor
seems to be worth some more tries too (just have to read more about
OCaml package management first).

> If you'd like to whip up some funds for a port, I'm sure the
> community would be grateful.

Of course i would like to do that - i guess most here would. And also as
most do, i have to pay my rent and food and then there is nothing left
to suppoort all the good things we all would like to support.

> You are a priori assuming that all of us Vim and Emacs users have
> never seen or used Visual Studio (or Eclipse before).

Nope - actually i asummed that you all know it and hate it for some
unknown reason (as it is the exact opposite of Emacs). As i really like
it, i used it as an Example for the almost perfect IDE i would wish to
have for OCaml. Just to be sure that everyone knows what i am searching for.

> A better tack might be to name a feature of your favourite GUI IDE
> which you perceive as lacking in our terribly dated "command line"
> editors (I personally regard gVim as a GUI editor, the clue being in
> the 'g'). There's a chance it's on a wish-list; there's a chance
> there's a perfectly reasonable other way...

The thing about software that is designed to be GUI-based from the start
is, that it really looks and feels like GUI-based. It does not look and
feel like terminal-based software that someone put into a window and
attached a toolbar to. I do not know if that difference is something i
really can describe good enough to get the point across - but it is the
same reason why Microsoft and Apple are "worth" billions of dollars on
the stock market. Its all about usability for the people who like
well-designed GUIs. That GUIs really sell well. There also are complete
Operating systems - and even hardware in case of Apple - below that
GUIs. But they are not the things that sell the product.
I really like GUIs for a lot of Tasks - including image editing and
coding. I also always got some terminal open too - but not for image
editing or coding.

>> Too bad they did their own .Net-based functional
>> language instead of adopting OCaml...
>
> Although they did use OCaml as a starting point for that language.

They grabbed something from here and there and then soaked it in their
disgusting .Net sauce (they instantly got a huge standard library and
community that way but i want the real thing).



-- 
Allan Wegan
<http://www.allanwegan.de/>
Jabber: allanwegan@ffnord.net
 OTR-Fingerprint: E4DCAA40 4859428E B3912896 F2498604 8CAA126F
Jabber: allanwegan@jabber.ccc.de
 OTR-Fingerprint: A1AAA1B9 C067F988 4A424D33 98343469 29164587
ICQ: 209459114
 OTR-Fingerprint: 71DE5B5E 67D6D758 A93BF1CE 7DA06625 205AC6EC


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

Re: [Caml-list] IDE like PyCharm - Results

[Kakadu]

I probably should stop procrastinating and port merlin to Qt Creator.....

2016-05-11 14:19 GMT+03:00 Allan Wegan <allanwegan@allanwegan.de>:
> <snip rant>
>
>>> Vim and Emacs are commandline editors - we got 2016 and IDEs for
>>> other languages evolved to be GUI-driven out there.
>>
>> Actually, IDEs for other languages evolved to be GUIs more than 20
>> years ago, having recently had the "pleasure" of reinstalling
>> Microsoft Visual C++ 4.
>
>> So calling Vim and Emacs users dated may not be a route to getting
>> advice (belligerent maybe...)
>
> So i should not call Emacs outdated because that is too much an
> understatement? English is not my first language - would "archaic" be
> more appropriate?
>
> By the way i did not even called the users outdated - just the IDE.
> Using outdated stuff is very popular by the youngsters where i live. We
> call them hipsters - and they call it vintage. Nothing wrong with that.
> I am not against using old Vectrex consoles and Emacs - i just do not
> use it myself. And i really try to ensure, that everyone who did not get
> the message the first time will have an increasing chance to get it in
> each iteration of the
> use-Emacs-its-great--nope-want-a-GUI-driven-solution cycle. That
> drastically increases the possibility, that even the one without any
> reading skill will get it at some point. He will sudeenly realize, that
> i am obviously not interested in using Emacs and therefore trying to
> advertise it again and again is just a waste of time.
>
> In hindsight i think i should have started with a flamewar against Emacs
> - that would have gotten the message around much faster. But i don't
> even hate Emacs - i just don't want to use it and therefore will not use it.
>
> And regarding getting advice - i got it from both - Emacs users and
> non-Emacs users. I am actually pretty satisfied as i also got results my
> internet search did not uncover. Sublime is really good. And OCamlEditor
> seems to be worth some more tries too (just have to read more about
> OCaml package management first).
>
>> If you'd like to whip up some funds for a port, I'm sure the
>> community would be grateful.
>
> Of course i would like to do that - i guess most here would. And also as
> most do, i have to pay my rent and food and then there is nothing left
> to suppoort all the good things we all would like to support.
>
>> You are a priori assuming that all of us Vim and Emacs users have
>> never seen or used Visual Studio (or Eclipse before).
>
> Nope - actually i asummed that you all know it and hate it for some
> unknown reason (as it is the exact opposite of Emacs). As i really like
> it, i used it as an Example for the almost perfect IDE i would wish to
> have for OCaml. Just to be sure that everyone knows what i am searching for.
>
>> A better tack might be to name a feature of your favourite GUI IDE
>> which you perceive as lacking in our terribly dated "command line"
>> editors (I personally regard gVim as a GUI editor, the clue being in
>> the 'g'). There's a chance it's on a wish-list; there's a chance
>> there's a perfectly reasonable other way...
>
> The thing about software that is designed to be GUI-based from the start
> is, that it really looks and feels like GUI-based. It does not look and
> feel like terminal-based software that someone put into a window and
> attached a toolbar to. I do not know if that difference is something i
> really can describe good enough to get the point across - but it is the
> same reason why Microsoft and Apple are "worth" billions of dollars on
> the stock market. Its all about usability for the people who like
> well-designed GUIs. That GUIs really sell well. There also are complete
> Operating systems - and even hardware in case of Apple - below that
> GUIs. But they are not the things that sell the product.
> I really like GUIs for a lot of Tasks - including image editing and
> coding. I also always got some terminal open too - but not for image
> editing or coding.
>
>>> Too bad they did their own .Net-based functional
>>> language instead of adopting OCaml...
>>
>> Although they did use OCaml as a starting point for that language.
>
> They grabbed something from here and there and then soaked it in their
> disgusting .Net sauce (they instantly got a huge standard library and
> community that way but i want the real thing).
>
>
>
> --
> Allan Wegan
> <http://www.allanwegan.de/>
> Jabber: allanwegan@ffnord.net
>  OTR-Fingerprint: E4DCAA40 4859428E B3912896 F2498604 8CAA126F
> Jabber: allanwegan@jabber.ccc.de
>  OTR-Fingerprint: A1AAA1B9 C067F988 4A424D33 98343469 29164587
> ICQ: 209459114
>  OTR-Fingerprint: 71DE5B5E 67D6D758 A93BF1CE 7DA06625 205AC6EC
>

RE: [Caml-list] IDE like PyCharm - Results

[David Allsopp]

Allan Wegan wrote:
> >> Vim and Emacs are commandline editors - we got 2016 and IDEs for
> >> other languages evolved to be GUI-driven out there.
> >
> > Actually, IDEs for other languages evolved to be GUIs more than 20
> > years ago, having recently had the "pleasure" of reinstalling
> > Microsoft Visual C++ 4.
> 
> > So calling Vim and Emacs users dated may not be a route to getting
> > advice (belligerent maybe...)
> 
> So i should not call Emacs outdated because that is too much an
> understatement? English is not my first language - would "archaic" be more
> appropriate?

Archaic would mean the same - at least it would underscore what certainly seems to be your opinion that "command line" editors belong to the past. I remain curious as to your justification for that. Not in terms of any flaming: perhaps there are other tools or pieces of advice for OCaml that may help.

> By the way i did not even called the users outdated - just the IDE.

As a speaker of one language only, I will always veer towards the benefit of the doubt towards anyone who speaks more than one language, but when you say "it's 2016 and other communities/languages are on GUIs" you are addressing users as well as tools!

> Using outdated stuff is very popular by the youngsters where i live. We
> call them hipsters - and they call it vintage. Nothing wrong with that.
> I am not against using old Vectrex consoles and Emacs - i just do not use
> it myself. And i really try to ensure, that everyone who did not get the
> message the first time will have an increasing chance to get it in each
> iteration of the use-Emacs-its-great--nope-want-a-GUI-driven-solution
> cycle. That drastically increases the possibility, that even the one
> without any reading skill will get it at some point. He will sudeenly
> realize, that i am obviously not interested in using Emacs and therefore
> trying to advertise it again and again is just a waste of time.
> 
> In hindsight i think i should have started with a flamewar against Emacs
> - that would have gotten the message around much faster. But i don't even
> hate Emacs - i just don't want to use it and therefore will not use it.

This definitely isn't a flame-war (indeed, your thread has caused me to discover that I can add a Vim plugin to Visual Studio next time I have to use it, so I learned something too!). I have no desire to convince you to use either Vim or Emacs, the problem is your strong assertion that a GUI IDE is superior to those tools, but you don't mention what it is about a GUI IDE (say Visual Studio) that you really need which no "command line editor"-based IDE can provide.

> And regarding getting advice - i got it from both - Emacs users and non-
> Emacs users. I am actually pretty satisfied as i also got results my
> internet search did not uncover. Sublime is really good. And OCamlEditor
> seems to be worth some more tries too (just have to read more about OCaml
> package management first).
> 
> > If you'd like to whip up some funds for a port, I'm sure the community
> > would be grateful.
> 
> Of course i would like to do that - i guess most here would. And also as
> most do, i have to pay my rent and food and then there is nothing left to
> suppoort all the good things we all would like to support.
> 
> > You are a priori assuming that all of us Vim and Emacs users have
> > never seen or used Visual Studio (or Eclipse before).
> 
> Nope - actually i asummed that you all know it and hate it for some
> unknown reason (as it is the exact opposite of Emacs). As i really like
> it, i used it as an Example for the almost perfect IDE i would wish to
> have for OCaml. Just to be sure that everyone knows what i am searching
> for.

I, for a limited example, have used Visual Studio for more than 20 years; I don't hate it. I have used ML for 15 years and Vim for fractionally less than that. In my OCaml development, I have never missed something from Visual Studio so much that I wished I could code OCaml using it (that's not strictly true - but Merlin solved that a while ago). For me personally, I find the code editor in Visual Studio a pathetic imitation of a text editor (to put it mischievously) - but then perhaps I can use a plugin to deal with that, as apparently someone at Microsoft has felt the same way too ;o)

> > A better tack might be to name a feature of your favourite GUI IDE
> > which you perceive as lacking in our terribly dated "command line"
> > editors (I personally regard gVim as a GUI editor, the clue being in
> > the 'g'). There's a chance it's on a wish-list; there's a chance
> > there's a perfectly reasonable other way...
> 
> The thing about software that is designed to be GUI-based from the start
> is, that it really looks and feels like GUI-based. It does not look and
> feel like terminal-based software that someone put into a window and
> attached a toolbar to. I do not know if that difference is something i
> really can describe good enough to get the point across - but it is the
> same reason why Microsoft and Apple are "worth" billions of dollars on the
> stock market. Its all about usability for the people who like well-
> designed GUIs. That GUIs really sell well. There also are complete
> Operating systems - and even hardware in case of Apple - below that GUIs.
> But they are not the things that sell the product.
> I really like GUIs for a lot of Tasks - including image editing and
> coding. I also always got some terminal open too - but not for image
> editing or coding.

Right, so apart from "selling OCaml better", what would/should it do? What's missing? It's not about trying to convince you to use an editor you don't want, it's just whether the tools you'd want to use as part of an IDE are only available in them or, more importantly, whether some tool you would use in the graphical IDE of your choice really isn't that important for OCaml.

> >> Too bad they did their own .Net-based functional language instead of
> >> adopting OCaml...
> >
> > Although they did use OCaml as a starting point for that language.
> 
> They grabbed something from here and there and then soaked it in their
> disgusting .Net sauce (they instantly got a huge standard library and
> community that way but i want the real thing).

I'm sure you give the F# and F* guys at Microsoft Research a chuckle...!


David

Re: [Caml-list] IDE like PyCharm - Results

[Hendrik Boom]

On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 02:30:37AM +0200, Allan Wegan wrote:

> 
> Vim and Emacs are commandline editors - we got 2016 and IDEs for other
> languages evolved to be GUI-driven out there.

I don't know vim, but emacs is *not* a command line editor.  It's a 
full-screen, text-mode only editor.

If you're looking for a true command-line editor, look at some of the 
editors I was using in the 60's and early 70's when we only had 
printing terminals like the ancient teletypes.  You gave them commands to go 
forward and backward in the text being edited, to search for particular 
strings because how else are you going to tell them where to go when 
you can'd even see the text you're editing (perhaps you had a 
line-printer listing so you could tell it what string to search for) 
and it wouldn't even show you the line you were working on unless you 
gave it a command to do so.

Those were command-line editors.

-- hendrik

Re: [Caml-list] IDE like PyCharm - Results

[Ivan Gotovchits]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1636 bytes --]

On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 9:43 AM, Hendrik Boom <hendrik@topoi.pooq.com>
wrote:

> On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 02:30:37AM +0200, Allan Wegan wrote:
>
> >
> > Vim and Emacs are commandline editors - we got 2016 and IDEs for other
> > languages evolved to be GUI-driven out there.
>
> I don't know vim, but emacs is *not* a command line editor.  It's a
> full-screen, text-mode only editor.
>

Yes! Moreover, emacs has a gui version for a long time. The gui version,
supports
mouse, rendering images and latex formulas, drop-down menus, and all the
stuff that one might
desire from a gui application. Maybe emacs gui is not as ugly as a regular
Qt[1] application,
but I can't blame it for this.

[1]: or winapi, or gtk or <you (un)favorite> gui framework


If you're looking for a true command-line editor, look at some of the
> editors I was using in the 60's and early 70's when we only had
> printing terminals like the ancient teletypes.  You gave them commands to
> go
> forward and backward in the text being edited, to search for particular
> strings because how else are you going to tell them where to go when
> you can'd even see the text you're editing (perhaps you had a
> line-printer listing so you could tell it what string to search for)
> and it wouldn't even show you the line you were working on unless you
> gave it a command to do so.
>
> Those were command-line editors.
>
> -- hendrik
>
>
> --
> Caml-list mailing list.  Subscription management and archives:
> https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list
> Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
> Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2704 bytes --]

[Caml-list] Ocaml and Windows' notion of Unicode file names

[Andreas Rossberg]

Does anybody have advice for dealing with unicode file names under Windows? In particular, my problem is that the following invariant

  let files = Array.to_list (Sys.readdir “.”) in
  assert (List.for_all Sys.file_exists files)

does not hold under Windows, because some of the file names returned by readdir are not valid.

The Unix emulation module has the same issue.

This is only partially Ocaml’s fault — I see that it implements Sys.readdir and Unix.readdir using Windows’ ASCII _findfirst and _findnext functions, which apparently just replace large code points with ‘?’. And I’m not sure how realistic it would be for Ocaml to switch to Windows' wchar APIs and, say, UTF8-encode/decode file names on its side.

But anyway, I’m wondering who else has run into this, and has an idea how to cope. Because I came up blank.

Thanks,
/Andreas

Re: [Caml-list] Ocaml and Windows' notion of Unicode file names

[Adrien Nader]

There was a thread about this back in february:
  "Looking for a windows ocaml UTF-16 encoded filename aware library".

-- 
Adrien Nader

Re: [Caml-list] Ocaml and Windows' notion of Unicode file names

[Matthieu Dubuget]

Le 15/05/2016 18:42, Adrien Nader a écrit :
> There was a thread about this back in february:
>   "Looking for a windows ocaml UTF-16 encoded filename aware library".
>

Hello,

the thread pointed by Adrien lists different solutions. One of them is to write a lightweight unicode-aware library. A cleaner solution is also currently proposed as a pull request against OCaml standard library (https://github.com/ocaml/ocaml/pull/153).

I tried the "small library" solution, which worked pretty well, but in my use-case, it appeared to be extremely slow. I did not yet test a mixed solution, that would switch to unicode versions of the calls, only when the non-unicode one are failing. Nor did I tried yet the pull request #153.

Note that on windows, there are two different problems to address when dealing with paths. The more obvious one is their encoding. But you may also experience problems depending on their length. In this case, the solution is to use
unicode-aware calls, and to specify an extended-length path, using the "\\?\" prefix. For example, "\\?\D:\very long path". I also have to check if this is slower.

Salutations

-- 
Matthieu Dubuget

Re: [Caml-list] Ocaml and Windows' notion of Unicode file names

[rossberg]

> Le 15/05/2016 18:42, Adrien Nader a écrit :
>> There was a thread about this back in february:
>>   "Looking for a windows ocaml UTF-16 encoded filename aware library".

Thanks for the replies. The pull request pointed to in that thread looks
interesting, but doesn't seem to have seen any activity in more than a year.
Are there still plans to advance it? Or is there an alternative in the
works?

Thanks,
/Andreas

Re: [Caml-list] IDE like PyCharm - Results

[Leonardo Laguna Ruiz]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2720 bytes --]



If you are willing to try one more alternative, I use Sublime Text 3 plus the plugin of merlin.

https://www.sublimetext.com/3
https://github.com/cynddl/sublime-text-merlin

I use this project "template" in every project I start.

https://github.com/modlfo/ocaml-sublimetext-template

Merlin through sublime text works quite well. The only problem I have had is with projects of tens of thousands lines of code, the autocomplete gets slow. In such cases I turn it off.

Sublime text is an excellent editor. Looks a lot like Atom but Sublime text is much faster and responsive.

Leonardo


> On 11 May 2016, at 00:04, Allan Wegan <allanwegan@allanwegan.de> wrote:
> 
> I checked the results of this thread and from my point of view, that are
> the results:
> 
> emacs:
> Already got two operating systems to use and don't want to learn another
> one. I know, you all *love* this beast. But i have used Windows for a
> long time before i switched to Gentoo. I just can't live without a
> usable GUI anymore.
> 
> Atom editor with Nuclide extension:
> $ opam install merlin ocamlbuild ocp-indent
> -> installed some stuff
> $ apm install nuclide language-ocaml ocaml-indent build
> -> "bash: apm: command not found"
> 
> OCaml-top:
> Single file solution - not really an IDE but still better than Scite
> (that i used until now) - so i tried to use that...
> ...but it failed with complaining about missing lablgtk2 (wich
> definitely is installed) on executing ocp-build to build it.
> 
> https://try.ocamlpro.com/:
> Nice tutorial and will use it - but it is not an IDE.
> 
> OcaIDE:
> Looks dead and installing Eclipse would probably lead to nightmares.
> 
> OCamlEditor:
> Looks good and i surely want to use it...
> ...but it failed with complaining about missing lablgtk2 (wich
> definitely is installed) on executing "ocaml build.ml ocamleditor" to
> build it.
> 
> 
> I think i somehow got into build environment hell. Is there any
> *working* tutorial about how to properly set up the build environment
> for OCamlEditor and/or OCaml-top?
> 
> I am also interested in other type-inferring (i love that concept)
> statically typed functional non-lazy-evaluation (no Haskell please)
> compiled languages - preferably one with a mature eco system (now that i
> have experienced how important that is).
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Allan Wegan
> <http://www.allanwegan.de/>
> Jabber: allanwegan@ffnord.net
> OTR-Fingerprint: E4DCAA40 4859428E B3912896 F2498604 8CAA126F
> Jabber: allanwegan@jabber.ccc.de
> OTR-Fingerprint: A1AAA1B9 C067F988 4A424D33 98343469 29164587
> ICQ: 209459114
> OTR-Fingerprint: 71DE5B5E 67D6D758 A93BF1CE 7DA06625 205AC6EC
> 

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4185 bytes --]