[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [DotGNU]IDE questions

From: David Sugar
Subject: Re: [DotGNU]IDE questions
Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2002 08:58:56 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20010914

Yes, this was exactly my original point :). The idea of having an XML project file is not bad in of itself, but the build tools should integrate with those that are already commonly used.

Similarly, autoconf and automake and make should be aware of what a C# (and Java, for that matter) source file is, and how to build it, with default make rules, etc. Having a csant as Rhy's suggests is also certainly very useful for people doing new projects and pure C# projects, but if one is mixing some C# within a larger C/C++ project, having our traditional build tools support this easily and automatically would be very useful as well.

S11001001 wrote:

Tomislav Sajdl wrote:

files, which is problem. What about idea to define in advance project file format for DotGNU? I would suggest it to be XML based. If we define all tags

Mr. Sugar's mention of this was in the context of his complaint about the development of _any_ special project file, XML or not. His original post said:

<<When one talks about IDE's in general, what I have always wanted was
something that integrated well with existing tools and practices.  Just
about every IDE I have ever seen insists on it's own specially formatted
"project file". What I would like is something that supports
autoconf/automake based build trees as we normally do them rather than a
foriegn project build format.>>

I totally agree with him on this point; I would like to see a development environment that only uses existing files; there seems to be enough information in existing build systems to build & coordinate a project, so why not rely on those files alone?

The closest he got to any sort of project file, XML included, was the mention of a /minimal/ project file that contained /minimal/ information.

Also, I would like to vote down the term 'IDE', as this implies a single program? The GDE (graphical development environment project, as I am calling it in the tasklist) will hopefully be quite different and more tolerable by experienced developers than 'IDE's.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]