Re: This is a simple question

["Marin David Condic" <dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org>]

"David Bolen" <db3l@fitlinxx.com> wrote in message
news:uelocpilj.fsf@ctwd0143.fitlinxx.com...
>
> There are definitely binary distributions (I guess Ted pointed to one
> in a separate response).  Normally you just manually unpack - it's not
> a horrendous Windows application that needs to put all sorts of files
> in the system directory, and the tiny (optional) tweak to the registry
> is handled by a single executable, so as nice as InstallShield can be
> its also overkill in this case.
>
Found a binary & got it to run. Still not as simple as an install-shield
that puts a little icon on your desktop, etc., but not horribly painful.
(I'd *still* suggest that if someone wants to promote it on a PC, that it
ought to install and look like a PC app, but that ends up a style war.)


>
> To Emacs, Ada is just another language binding that it supports, so
> no, there isn't a specialized Ada-ized version of it.  That's not to
> say that the Ada major-mode isn't as good as any other IDE at handling
> Ada, only that it's just one of many to Emacs.

It seemed to come up with an Ada menu option when I figured out how to open
up an Ada file - why no pop-up window with a file selection screen? (We're
back to bitching about it not looking like a Windows app.) And here's the
main gripe: After pointing it at an Ada file, it quite nicely opened it up
and managed to look like Notepad or any other standard issue text editor.
Gee. That's swell. Why not just use whatever standard-issue text editor
thats already on my system?

What I'd like for something that purports to be an IDE to do is let me point
it at a directory full of Ada files and have it put all those files off on a
column on the left with little plus signs that let me click on them and see
all the procedures within the packages, etc. EMACS is supposed to do this?
Again, if it does, it doesn't do it automatically and it doesn't have a
"Open Up A Directory Full Of Ada Files And Put Them In A Pannel On The Left"
menu entry. I suppose I could RTFM, but like I tried to point out - I'm
reacting here like a garden variety PC user - I don't want to *study* it - I
just want to *use* it.

>
> I did take a look at AdaGide and it appears quite capable.
> Interestingly enough, as an Emacs user, I have the opposite reaction
> though - I hate using a tool that is only set up for one language.
> Rather than switching to AdaGide when I'd want to do Ada, I just use
> the same tool I already use for C, C++, Python, etc...  (I avoid the
> VC++ IDE unless absolutely necessary too for example).
>
I'm not holding up AdaGide as an end-all, be-all of IDEs for Ada. What it
*does* do is provide a pretty simple editor that is integrated with the
compiler & debugger and looks like a basic PC app that an average PC user
can figure out without reading a manual. (At least to do the basic things
like edit/compile/link/run) EMACS may do all of that and so much more, but
it just isn't an *obvious* IDE for Ada.


>
> I'm not sure I'd necessarily subject it to the "not want to
> 'understand' it" though - it's not a simple calculator or one purpose
> tool.  It's a general purpose, extensible editor, that can be a very
> powerful tool for a developer, but one which requires some investment
> in time to harness and grow comfortable with.  Not altogether unlike
> other development tools.  So sure you want to get up and running
> reasonably fast, but I'd keep an expectation of working to learn the
> system as the best way to reap the most benefits.
>
Well, my harangue against EMACS stems from earlier discussions about using
it as the basis for an IDE for Ada - making a "kit" for Ada development that
starts to look like other "kits" for other languages. My objection is not
that EMACS lacks power (I'm told by people I trust that it has lots of
power - maybe too much power.) My objection is that as it currently stands,
it doesn't pop-up as an Ada-oriented IDE with fairly obvious
buttons/menus/icons/whatever that do the things one would typically want to
do with a library full of Ada stuff and do it in an
intuitively-obvious-to-the-casual-PS-oriented-observer way.


> For me, over the years, my investment in Emacs as my primary
> development editor and environment has paid off handsomely.  I've been
> using Emacs as my sole development editor for the last 17 years or so
> (first got introduced on a Tops-20 system), across at least 3-4 major
> Emacs implementations, 4-5 major system types and even more variants
> of Unix, working under a dozen or so languages, and even the majority
> of my current local initialization file has been with me for over 10
> years.  It's been around as long or longer than many of the languages
> I use, not to mention most PC operating systems and even PCs.  I think
> I've "touch-typed" Emacs editing commands for a while now :-)
>
I've used EMACS (and XEMACS) in various forms on Unix platforms before in
fairly casual ways and never really wanted to learn all of the details. I've
always felt it had a fairly UNIXey feel to it and sort of thought of it as
VI on steroids. From what I've seen of it lately and what others have said
about it, it looks like its an operating-system-wannabe. (Do I *really* need
it to do e-mail for me?) I suppose it would have its share of followers and
those willing to learn all of its ins and outs will be rewarded by the power
available to them, but if I were designing an Ada IDE, I'd do it very
differently. (Create all the clever powerful features you want, but make the
*basics* stand out as obvious and simple to use.)


>
> The above isn't said to try to convert anyone (Editor battles are just
> pointless), but just to try to give a flavor of how Emacs sort of
> settles into your bones as a developer over time, and thus why its
> die-hard users may make such a big deal about it.
>
I agree. I used to be a major TPU fan when I was still using VAX/Alpha/VMS
equipmentand learned all the ins and outs of using that. You end up liking
what you're used to using and what you've bothered to spend time learning. I
don't begrudge EMACS fans their editor of choice - more power to them. I
just wouldn't try to use it as the basis for an Ada IDE if I was building
one from bottom-dead-center with the goal of making a commercially viable
development kit. I'd want something that looked more like what PC developers
are used to seeing. I don't see EMACS fitting that description. Just my
opinion......

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com
Web:      http://www.mcondic.com/