From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46CDA7F20B for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 23:06:46 +0100 (CET) Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of edwin+ml-ocaml@etorok.net) identity=pra; client-ip=176.9.138.55; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="edwin+ml-ocaml@etorok.net"; x-sender="edwin+ml-ocaml@etorok.net"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: domain of edwin+ml-ocaml@etorok.net designates 176.9.138.55 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=176.9.138.55; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="edwin+ml-ocaml@etorok.net"; x-sender="edwin+ml-ocaml@etorok.net"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1" Received-SPF: Pass (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: domain of postmaster@mail.etorok.net designates 176.9.138.55 as permitted sender) identity=helo; client-ip=176.9.138.55; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="edwin+ml-ocaml@etorok.net"; x-sender="postmaster@mail.etorok.net"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1" X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgIFACQNHFGwCYo3/2dsb2JhbABFgmyDY7ogFnOCHwEBBAEjHQEBNgIECwsYAgIFFgsCAgkDAgECAUUTBgICF4dxBwOsPnGDSgEFjlEGgSOMIRODGoETlieQU4MIgWcCHg X-IPAS-Result: AgIFACQNHFGwCYo3/2dsb2JhbABFgmyDY7ogFnOCHwEBBAEjHQEBNgIECwsYAgIFFgsCAgkDAgECAUUTBgICF4dxBwOsPnGDSgEFjlEGgSOMIRODGoETlieQU4MIgWcCHg X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,658,1355094000"; d="scan'208";a="2778217" Received: from mail.etorok.net ([176.9.138.55]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 13 Feb 2013 23:06:45 +0100 Received: from [IPv6:2a02:2f09:4050:167:1e6f:65ff:fe23:db0d] (unknown [IPv6:2a02:2f09:4050:167:1e6f:65ff:fe23:db0d]) by mail.etorok.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B062B46B5 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 23:06:44 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=etorok.net; s=MAILOUT; t=1360793205; bh=iuykH+0kv4RUKFsVsm/yLpEWIjdDEfR3eU/7mJbZYPM=; h=Message-ID:Date:From:MIME-Version:To:Subject:References: In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=RL1vO/9rZPVC3dg8/XfevUcBgtnsTxL/VTJtB+IKF0O9/PgyTJtxol3xB7P20syxI x3IZveW+IpR1Iy0amFgxBp+/907LpAjiR5j8SgteNqnGgqk7DbD8Jw7OysWpue3Qut R8E9zADeTPiYg2kXNuJ9VC4YDANdKkNVIFZwsQbA= Message-ID: <511C0E73.3040808@etorok.net> Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 00:06:43 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?VMO2csO2ayBFZHdpbg==?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.12) Gecko/20130116 Icedove/10.0.12 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: caml-list@inria.fr References: <1360775393.2379.8@samsung> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.97.6 at mail X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: AW: AW: [Caml-list] geany as an ocaml ide On 02/13/2013 11:17 PM, Wojciech Meyer wrote: > Gerd Stolpmann writes: > >> I can well imagine such a toolkit - basically an editor without user >> interface. It would just consist of the underlying modules, and would >> solve all difficult tasks - like incremental indentation, or >> transparent network file access. Other developers can then pick things >> up - only parts, or everything - and I'm sure we'll see then a couple >> of GUIs on top of this, some expressive, some minimalistic, some >> specializing on certain domains (web, GUI, etc.), some cloning emacs. >> And, as you write, existing editors can be "upgraded" by providing >> bindings. > > I think the major point we raised here, that we all want the same from the > editor: syntax highlighting, parsing in the background, invoking tools, > editing over the network etc. However, each of us, have a completely > different taste of how we interact with the editor and how we use the > GUI. Don't forget that the preferred "GUI" is sometimes just a console application. I'm using vim to edit files in remote ssh sessions (unless latency makes it impractical), and even on the desktop I much prefer the console version: mostly because its so easy to put it into the background, do some other tasks (building / debugging), then bring back the editor to fix things, and so on. For some reason I also find it easier to switch between console tabs in Konsole than between multiple windows. > For one person this might be Emacs which wins, other prefer > Code::Blocks. What matters here is not to focus on GUI but the features > that would be accessible from the different frontends. (which seem to be > a little hard, given diversity of the solutions on the market, but > perhaps possible) I agree that the focus should be on functionality, if I see an IDE with features I like my first thought would be: "thats nice, now how do I make that work in Vim?". If an OCaml library, or even just a command-line tool is provided that implements feature X independently of the full editor, then its a matter of writing some editor-specific scripts to hook it up. On the other hand care should be taken when advertising the editor for beginners: - if editor lacks feature X, then a beginner might generalize that to "Ocaml is the language without X" - will the editor be maintained with new ocaml releases? - once the beginner is ready to move to more advanced features, are they required to abandon the editor, or will it be customizable with plugins? - once the beginner is ready to move on to using , how can the features of the ocaml editor be accomplished there? Also are we talking about complete beginners to programming, or beginners to OCaml that know other languages already? I think that having an ocaml-specific editor with all the features people typically want from the IDE would not necessarily be bad though, in the sense that it shows whats *possible* for an OCaml editor. And it'd be something people can easily try out. For example Java has an IDE written in Java that people (at least those that I know) like a lot, unfortunately its not the open source one: IntelliJ Idea. If something that has similar features and ease of use could be implemented in OCaml that'd be a good advertisement for the language itself too. On the other hand integrating the new features with existing editors *first* would IMHO probably be better. > >> Let's call this "editor" ModelOnly (following the common >> model/view/controller abstraction). > > Certainly one does not exclude the other option! > > I just drew the border of the simple editor, and design requriments for > the "ModelOnly". > >> I completely agree that there are totally different requirements if you >> compare the needs of beginners and professionals. However, this is >> mostly a matter of presentation, and implementation-wise, there is a >> lot of overlap, and also an editor for beginners would profit from a >> good model library. > > One could think about different incarnations of the same editor, did > anybody think about Emacs, beginner mode, with CUA bindings and limited > access to the functionality just so to make it easily accessible for the > beginners? >From what I've seen at beginners in other languages they used: (on Linux) Kate, Emacs (using the menus, not the shortcuts), mcedit, Code::Blocks, Eclipse/Netbeans; Dev-C++ and the various Visual* stuff on Win32. Out of those Kate seems to be the easiest to just start using, as it has a terminal too (and it supports plugins/extensions), but I don't know if / how well it'd work on Win32. Unfortunately it is the first time I've heard of Geany, haven't seen anyone use it. Best regards, --Edwin