From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,57654867e5205348 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-02-06 17:18:13 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!tethys.csu.net!nntp.csufresno.edu!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-01!sn-post-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail From: "Larry Barowski" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: C# should be last plain-text language Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 19:22:06 -0600 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: <1028f364e6smfca@corp.supernews.com> References: <97f98cd5.0402052229.7f184e38@posting.google.com> X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:5300 Date: 2004-02-06T19:22:06-06:00 List-Id: > "Marius Amado Alves" wrote in message news:mailman.1.1076068084.295.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org... > Peter Amey wrote: > > Amir Yantimirov wrote: > > > http://www174.pair.com/yamir/programming/sharplast.htm > > > It's my view of how program development should be organized on any > > > language.... > > Looks rather like "literate programming" [Knuth 1984]. > > To me looks more like a specification document for something like jGRASP. >From the web page, "XML advocates can propose some format to extend existent programming languages (XADA, XC++, XC# ...) and express generation of any view or pure files through transformations. Though I personally prefer binary formats I think XML solution have more chanses to be accepted by broad community. The other possible way is including some META-comments in source files." It seems to me that you don't need any of those, and would be better off doing this another way. All the views and editing features you want can be created on demand from plain text source code, with only a "special comment" syntax, like javadoc comments, for structure-specific comments and one for "ability to mark declaration as commented out (for debug purpose)". You can store information on the current state of the views (what is folded, etc.) in a separate database. If someone edits the code outside of your tool, they will lose that state (no big deal), unless the other editor is compatible with your tool. This way developers will be able to work with raw source code and other editing tools if they want to (and they will want to), but still have the views and features you want. From the point of view of someone who uses your tool exclusively, there is essentially no difference between a META-language or META-comments and using a database. This is the method we use to store source code folding information, breakpoint locations, etc. in jGRASP. -Larry Barowski