Any chance #6 (refactoring) on the following wiki page would be one of
those new features? http://tinyurl.com/5nx8j
I don't believe so, but the new version uses the parser from JRuby and
has a more robust model which will enable development of refactoring in
the future.
Refactoring is not a problem you can solve with a parser. You need
runtime semantics.
A parser helps only in static typed languages and
for some very easy refactoring moves. Thats why none of the non image
script languages haven't good refactoring tools - and will never
have.
···
--
Best regards, emailto: scholz at scriptolutions dot com
Lothar Scholz http://www.ruby-ide.com
CTO Scriptolutions Ruby, PHP, Python IDE 's
> more Ruby specific IDE (like FreeRIDE?). (I may eventually learn C and
> write a few C programs ("extensions" to Ruby).)
Ruby support in KDevelop 3.2.0 is probably at least good as Eclipse RDT,
although KDevelop doesn't run on Windows. I would love to hear the opinion
of someone who has tried both too.
Richard, what are the chances we can get Kdevelop running on Win32
when QT is finally freed for that platform ?
Will it be a tough port to have ?
Ruby support in KDevelop 3.2.0 is probably at least good as Eclipse RDT,
although KDevelop doesn't run on Windows. I would love to hear the opinion
of someone who has tried both too.
I have used Eclipse with RDT for quite a while, but a couple months ago I
started switching to KDevelop, in large part because KDevelop gives me
(almost) everything I like about Eclipse in a faster, less bulky package.
If my development box were a cutting edge, super fast machine with a lot of
excess RAM, I probably wouldn't have as much incentive to use KDevelop, but
given that it's not any of those things, I've so far not found a lot to
complain about with KDevelop. In fact, if I could hook it to my CVS
repository so that I could be extra lazy and do commits from within the
editor, and if I could have a tree view of my project areas (and maybe I
can and just need to learn the app better), I'd really have nothing to
complain about.
Eclipse + RTD is good, but KDevelop, at least for Linux, has the potential
to be great.
A parser helps only in static typed languages and
for some very easy refactoring moves. Thats why none of the non image
script languages haven't good refactoring tools - and will never
have.
Can you explain this further, please?
Some refactorings are not relevant to untyped language (e.g., changing the type). Others work just fine on the AST (e.g., rename). What sorts of problems do you foresee?
> more Ruby specific IDE (like FreeRIDE?). (I may eventually learn C and
> write a few C programs ("extensions" to Ruby).)
Ruby support in KDevelop 3.2.0 is probably at least good as Eclipse RDT,
although KDevelop doesn't run on Windows. I would love to hear the
opinion of someone who has tried both too.
Richard, what are the chances we can get Kdevelop running on Win32
when QT is finally freed for that platform ?
Will it be a tough port to have ?
Probably not too difficult, but it is a bit of a sore point with some KDE
developers. Have a look at this announcement about some progress with a
KDELibs/Win32 port, and the ensuing heated discussion:
Ruby support in KDevelop 3.2.0 is probably at least good as Eclipse RDT,
although KDevelop doesn't run on Windows. I would love to hear the
opinion of someone who has tried both too.
I have used Eclipse with RDT for quite a while, but a couple months ago I
started switching to KDevelop, in large part because KDevelop gives me
(almost) everything I like about Eclipse in a faster, less bulky package.
If my development box were a cutting edge, super fast machine with a lot
of excess RAM, I probably wouldn't have as much incentive to use KDevelop,
but given that it's not any of those things, I've so far not found a lot
to
complain about with KDevelop. In fact, if I could hook it to my CVS
repository so that I could be extra lazy and do commits from within the
editor, and if I could have a tree view of my project areas (and maybe I
can and just need to learn the app better), I'd really have nothing to
complain about.
KDevelop certainly has built in CVS support, so you can do what you
describe. And it has a what I would call a tree view of the project areas
under the 'File Tree' tab.
Eclipse + RTD is good, but KDevelop, at least for Linux, has the potential
to be great.
That's certainly encouraging. It would be very hard to catch up with Eclipse
for java support, but for other languages like ruby and C++ I think we can
do at least as well as Eclipse.
KDevelop is Free Software with a low barrier to entry. If it has something
missing, such as a Rails project template or whatever, please feel free to
join in. Mail me for help, and/or subscribe to the
kdevelop-devel@kdevelop.org mailing list..
There is a very annoying bug where the icons for the debugger step options
don't installed properly in the 3.2.0 release. I've fixed that in the cvs,
in both the HEAD and KDE_3_4_RELEASE branches. Because nobody has
complained, I was wondering if anyone was actually using it for ruby
development.
I have used Eclipse with RDT for quite a while, but a couple months ago I
started switching to KDevelop, in large part because KDevelop gives me
(almost) everything I like about Eclipse in a faster, less bulky package.
Another +1 for jEdit. You can even write macros in jEdit using Ruby
(with the superscript plugin). Not to mention cross platform
compatability.
Matt
···
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 03:21:01 +0900, B. K. Oxley (binkley) <binkley@alumni.rice.edu> wrote:
Lothar Scholz wrote:
> A parser helps only in static typed languages and
> for some very easy refactoring moves. Thats why none of the non image
> script languages haven't good refactoring tools - and will never
> have.
Can you explain this further, please?
Some refactorings are not relevant to untyped language (e.g., changing
the type). Others work just fine on the AST (e.g., rename). What sorts
of problems do you foresee?
A parser helps only in static typed languages and
for some very easy refactoring moves. Thats why none of the non image
script languages haven't good refactoring tools - and will never
have.
Can you explain this further, please?
Some refactorings are not relevant to untyped language (e.g., changing
the type). Others work just fine on the AST (e.g., rename). What sorts
of problems do you foresee?
This is a typical java -> ruby switcher question
If you want rename method call "subscribe" in class "Newspaper" to a
method call "register", then how do you know if
foo->subscribe(a,b)
should be renamed? You can only look at heuristics like: it has two
parameters like the subscribe method i want to rename, so i hope it is
a call of a Newspaper.subscribe and not of RealEstateContract.subscribe
Another question:
And how do you find all files where we look for subscribe ?
This can be very hard to tell. require is way too dynamic.
Think about it and further problems or just search groups.google
to find more discussions about the problem.
···
--
Best regards, emailto: scholz at scriptolutions dot com
Lothar Scholz http://www.ruby-ide.com
CTO Scriptolutions Ruby, PHP, Python IDE 's
KDevelop certainly has built in CVS support, so you can do what you
describe. And it has a what I would call a tree view of the project areas
under the 'File Tree' tab.
See, there you go. I just need to look around a little bit more.
KDevelop is Free Software with a low barrier to entry. If it has something
missing, such as a Rails project template or whatever, please feel free to
join in. Mail me for help, and/or subscribe to the
kdevelop-devel@kdevelop.org mailing list..
Hmmm. Contacting you offlist....
There is a very annoying bug where the icons for the debugger step options
don't installed properly in the 3.2.0 release. I've fixed that in the cvs,
in both the HEAD and KDE_3_4_RELEASE branches. Because nobody has
complained, I was wondering if anyone was actually using it for ruby
development.
I have never looked at the debugger, but I'll look it over and let you know
what I run into. IOWA apps run as separate processes from the web server,
so I should be able to use the debugger to debug them directly. If so,
that would be QUITE handy.
A parser helps only in static typed languages and
for some very easy refactoring moves. Thats why none of the non image
script languages haven't good refactoring tools - and will never
have.
> Can you explain this further, please?
> Some refactorings are not relevant to untyped language (e.g., changing
> the type). Others work just fine on the AST (e.g., rename). What sorts
> of problems do you foresee?
This is a typical java -> ruby switcher question
If you want rename method call "subscribe" in class "Newspaper" to a
method call "register", then how do you know if
They can't. But method arguments have names there, so the name
of a method is longer and not so overloaded.
The refactoring browser also adds methods under the old name into the
image that simply raise an inspector window and cry for help if
something is going wrong after the refactoring.
And you normally get a lot of warnings from the refactoring browser
with locations where you must look manually to decide if it should
rename a method or not. It's far from being as automated as in Java
IDE's. Its just that many people only read about it but never tried
it.
And remember that Smalltalk does not have all the manipulation you can
do with file loading and class/method setups. This reduces the
complexity of a refactoring browser by one magnitude.
···
--
Best regards, emailto: scholz at scriptolutions dot com
Lothar Scholz http://www.ruby-ide.com
CTO Scriptolutions Ruby, PHP, Python IDE 's
since it is image based and it actually has all the code running all the time, I think. See the "non image script based" thing in Lothar's previous message
* Christian Neukirchen <chneukirchen@gmail.com> [2005-03-29 04:53:19 +0900]:
The very reasons I like using emacs.
I agree. Question though, what have you been using for your view
work? I've been using nxml-mode but the "invalid" at the bottom bugs
me. It should be possible to use mmm-mode and use nxml-mode for the
xhtml stuff, then drop into ruby mode for anything between <% %>. I
haven't had the courage to try this out yet though.
since it is image based and it actually has all the code running all
the time, I think. See the "non image script based" thing in Lothar's
previous message
* Christian Neukirchen <chneukirchen@gmail.com> [2005-03-29 04:53:19 +0900]:
The very reasons I like using emacs.
I agree. Question though, what have you been using for your view
work? I've been using nxml-mode but the "invalid" at the bottom bugs
me. It should be possible to use mmm-mode and use nxml-mode for the
xhtml stuff, then drop into ruby mode for anything between <% %>. I
haven't had the courage to try this out yet though.
Fortunately I dont have to use ERB. (Any my own templating engine
plays rather nice with XML.)
Alternatively, design the page in nxml, then switch to xhtml-mode.
You cannot validate ERB anyway. Or use nxml, but toggle validation
with C-c C-v, then the underlines will get removed.
