Re: [MiNT] QED

[Eero Tamminen <oak@helsinkinet.fi>]

Hi,

On Thursday 07 January 2010, p.slegg@scubadivers.co.uk wrote:
> >a) Fork qed.
> >b) Don't fork, but make it possible to compile a plain text-editor as
> > well as the complete IDE.
> >c) Don't integrate everything into one binary, but create several tools
> > and tie them together with a clever protocol.
> >
> >Personally I'd prefer (c).

I like  (c) too, but what about extending AHCC instead of QED?


> >It's easier to create several small tools 
> > than one huge program. And it's easier to debug and easier to maintain.
> > You will get the project to a usable state quicker, and it would be
> > easier to extend it with new tools later on.
>
> I am not a Java fan either (nor C for that matter) but IDEA is a good
> IDE.
>
> Whether you decide to branch QED or just develop it, the older versions
> of QED will remain and there are other editors.
>
> A set of tools would have to be well integrated to work well.
>
> Are there any open source IDE projects we could borrow from ?
>
> IDEA has loads of features, many of which I never use but here are some
> of the basic features I like and rely on, in no particular order.
>
> Editor
> * can jump from a variable/function use to it's definition
> * can search code for usages of a function/object
> * can see changed modules and which lines and rollback individual changes
>
> CVS
> * can compare local code with CVS rep
> * can merge bits of code from CVS into local version
> * easy to CVS update/commit/checkout/rollback
>
> Debug
> * easily set breakpoints in code
> * can ignore breakpoints without having to remove them
> * jump from errors to code
> * can see all variable in scope and values

Using which debugger?


	- Eero