lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry Phillips) (08/27/90)
In <1990Aug27.092147.15405@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG>, xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) writes: > >The BENCHMARK Modula-2 compiler is integrated with a version of emacs >(not as nice as mg, but OK), with compile, link, and test, and bounce >to errors from the compiler to the editor, all hooked up to functions >keys, and it makes for an excellent development environment. I think >this demonstrates that your suggestion is quite feasible to implement. Well, it's an excellent development environment for those who can stomach the only editor it works with. >Now, how many of the Amiga community are emacs/mg users, and how many >use commercial editors, DME, Stevie, or the other available options to >do program development? I know I use my BENCHMARK emacs editor as my >everyday text editor, but is this mg/emacs use common or rare out >there in comp.sys.amiga-land? The very presence of many editors should serve to point the One True Way to implementing development environments. >If common, lots of notes to the SAS/Lattice folks promoting this idea >as an option (or only choice, but this is harder with an existing user >base), even at added cost, might be the way to go; wording like: Let's get them going on implementing a development environment via ARexx, and while we're at it, let's hit up out favourite editor authors to add fully functional ARexx interfaces to their products. It's coming anyway, standard, so we may as well get the full benefit of it. I don't much care, personally, since my editor handles all that stuff quite well. I just wish some of the tools I use had better hooks into them. -larry -- It is not possible to both understand and appreciate Intel CPUs. -D.Wolfskill +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | // Larry Phillips | | \X/ lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca -or- uunet!van-bc!lpami!lphillips | | COMPUSERVE: 76703,4322 -or- 76703.4322@compuserve.com | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) (08/27/90)
jkh@meepmeep.pcs.com (Jordan K. Hubbard) writes: >I would be much happier using LSE if: [good stuff] >What I think should be done instead, however, is to extend mg so that >it supports the desired features of LSE. Namely, "C" awareness and the >ability to spawn the compiler as a subtask, finding the errors as >necessary. Furthermore, I think that Lattice should be the ones to do >it, chucking LSE out the window. Should I say it? Should I invite the >religious wrath of hundreds down upon my head? Aww, why not. I don't get >enough mail anyway :-). We really really don't need Yet Another Editor. >What we need is a one nice general purpose editor that people can >rebind to their heart's content and run across multiple platforms. [and lots more good stuff] The BENCHMARK Modula-2 compiler is integrated with a version of emacs (not as nice as mg, but OK), with compile, link, and test, and bounce to errors from the compiler to the editor, all hooked up to functions keys, and it makes for an excellent development environment. I think this demonstrates that your suggestion is quite feasible to implement. Now, how many of the Amiga community are emacs/mg users, and how many use commercial editors, DME, Stevie, or the other available options to do program development? I know I use my BENCHMARK emacs editor as my everyday text editor, but is this mg/emacs use common or rare out there in comp.sys.amiga-land? If common, lots of notes to the SAS/Lattice folks promoting this idea as an option (or only choice, but this is harder with an existing user base), even at added cost, might be the way to go; wording like: I'd pay BIG, BIG BUCKS for an integrated "mg" replacement for LSE; otherwise I'm going with Manx out of spite, and telling all my MANY, MANY RICH COMPILER-BUYING FRIENDS, who ALSO want "mg" as their ONLY editor, to do the same. would probably get their attention. ;-) But first, is there a market? Kent, the man from xanth. <xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <xanthian@well.sf.ca.us>
mwm@raven.pa.dec.com (Mike (Real Amigas have keyboard garages) Meyer) (08/28/90)
In article <1990Aug27.092147.15405@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) writes:
The BENCHMARK Modula-2 compiler is integrated with a version of emacs
(not as nice as mg, but OK), with compile, link, and test, and bounce
to errors from the compiler to the editor, all hooked up to functions
keys, and it makes for an excellent development environment. I think
this demonstrates that your suggestion is quite feasible to implement.
Um, if I've got things right (and I may not), that editor was based on
an early version of mg. In other words, someone did exactly what
Jordan suggested, only for Modula-2 instead of C.
<mike
--
All around my hat, I will wear the green willow. Mike Meyer
And all around my hat, for a twelve-month and a day. mwm@relay.pa.dec.com
And if anyone should ask me, the reason why I'm wearing it, decwrl!mwm
It's all for my true love, who's far far away.stelmack@screamer.csee.usf.edu (Gregory M. Stelmack) (08/28/90)
My $.02 worth...
What's so bad about LSE? The only shortcoming I have found is a lack of
on-line Autodocs-like help, but for structure-type help you COULD open another
window and specify the file name as something like INCLUDE:exec/types.h and
check the file out yourself...
The only annoying thing I've found with LSE is that if you have automatic
indent for { and }, and type an if without braces, and then close a loop (i.e.
something like:
while()
{
if (...) do;
}
) see where it places that last brace? No proper line-up. But that's minor,
and I have yet to have a need for all the fancy multi-keystroke commands so
many of you want. Most of those are taken care of with mouse and menus.
Anyway, just had to step in and defend my good-ole LSE (which stomps all over
the vi I have to use at school...)
-- Greg Stelmack
-- Email: stelmack@sol.csee.usf.edu
-- USMail: USF Box 1510, Tampa, FL 33620-1510lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry Phillips) (08/28/90)
In <18@screamer.csee.usf.edu>, stelmack@screamer.csee.usf.edu (Gregory M. Stelmack) writes: >My $.02 worth... > >What's so bad about LSE? The same thing that is wrong with every single editor you will ever see. It's a religious thing. No editor will please everyone, not even the best one. :-) -larry -- It is not possible to both understand and appreciate Intel CPUs. -D.Wolfskill +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | // Larry Phillips | | \X/ lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca -or- uunet!van-bc!lpami!lphillips | | COMPUSERVE: 76703,4322 -or- 76703.4322@compuserve.com | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
mwm@raven.pa.dec.com (Mike (Real Amigas have keyboard garages) Meyer) (08/29/90)
In article <18@screamer.csee.usf.edu> stelmack@screamer.csee.usf.edu (Gregory M. Stelmack) writes:
What's so bad about LSE?
Well, since you asked:
It's not sufficiently configurable.
Not enough buffers.
Not enough windows.
No ARexx port (pre 5.10; the one in 5.10 has some serious
problems that may just be bad documentation - see sas.c/amiga.c
on BIX for my comments on that).
It's to big. mg is huge, because it adds a layer of abstraction for
portability. Last time I checked, mg was smaller than LSE in spite of
this.
The one Amiga way has already been pointed out: Use an editor with an
ARexx port, and tools that talk to it. Just got to get Lattice to add
hooks to the compiler (via SASCOPTIONS?) so that I can tell it what
string(s) to send to which port when the -E option is used...
<mike
--
He was your reason for living Mike Meyer
So you once said mwm@relay.pa.dec.com
Now your reason for living decwrl!mwm
Has left you half deadxanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) (08/29/90)
stelmack@screamer.csee.usf.edu (Gregory M. Stelmack) writes: > >What's so bad about LSE? Probably not a thing. The argument being made is that, for folks who work on a lot of platforms and with a lot of products, it gets to be a pain having to use a proprietary editor with each, when a widely ported editor ( Unix emacs and its children) is available, well known and respected, and capable of being dropped in as a replacement for the proprietary products. I haven't used Amiga's ed or edit since I got a micro-emacs working here on Ami, and if the emacs clone shipped with the Amiga were a little more robust, I'd be using it daily. My USENet host seems to have only "vi" available, so I've had to relearn an editor I'd hoped never to see again after finding emacs. Since I swap screens with a keystroke, and edit alternately on my dial up host and on Ami, I'm forever using the keystrokes for the incorrect editor. I think this is the trouble most folks see with LSE, not that it has any quality problems per se. For me, again, I use emacs to edit code for Lattice C, and forego the integrated editor, nice as it might be, because adding another editor whose command keystrokes I must multiplex is more painful than is doing all my C development and debugging without the integrated development support. Kent, the man from xanth. <xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <xanthian@well.sf.ca.us>
mwm@raven.pa.dec.com (Mike (Real Amigas have keyboard garages) Meyer) (08/30/90)
In article <3910@bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu> consp13@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu (Marcus Cannava) writes:
Well, I actually have a simpler question..
I have mg3beta4 (or whatever -- the latest beta of mg with AREXX
etc).. I can't use it on my A3000 because it barfs on the new
fonts.
Works fine for me. What fonts are you using that it breaks on?
How do you tell mg to fire up on its own custom screen? (somewhat
like memacs on the 2.0 EXTRAS disk?)
By changing the source code to have it open on a custom screen.
I really need a good AREXX-supporting editor..
Someone claimed that memacs had AREXX support. You might also look
into DME, or one of the other micro-emacs that have source, and adding
your own REXX support.
Or, you could offer me a contract to add the features you want 1/2 :-).
<mike
--
I went down to the hiring fair, Mike Meyer
For to sell my labor. mwm@relay.pa.dec.com
I noticed a maid in the very next row, decwrl!mwm
I hoped she'd be my neighbor.consp13@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu (Marcus Cannava) (08/30/90)
Well, I actually have a simpler question.. I have mg3beta4 (or whatever -- the latest beta of mg with AREXX etc).. I can't use it on my A3000 because it barfs on the new fonts. How do you tell mg to fire up on its own custom screen? (somewhat like memacs on the 2.0 EXTRAS disk?) I really need a good AREXX-supporting editor.. \marc ==== 'I do not fear computers.. I fear the lack of them' -- I. Asimov RNM
consp11@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu (Brett Kessler) (08/30/90)
On a related not, just what _IS_ mg? I've never heard of it, and I am quite curious. Since I got my Amiga, I've gone through a number of editors, including (but not limited to) Emacs, MEmacs, LSE, Ed, QEd, CEd, and more. Never heard of mg though. +------///-+------------------| BRETT KESSLER |------------------+-\\\------+ | /// | consp11@bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu | \\\ | | \\\/// | consp11@bingvaxa.BITNET | \\\/// | | \XX/ | (PeopleLink) B.KESSLER | \XX/ | +----------+-----------------------------------------------------+----------+