This is one of the mot interesting concepts for an IDE I've seen in awhile.
9 plus ones
Shared publicly•View activity
View 8 previous comments
- I think that's my eternal problem: I want vim bindings for any given text editor. And even when I get vim bindings, they aren't as good as the real vim bindings.Apr 13, 2012
- hey hey, what about those of us who prefer emacs bindings? :PApr 13, 2012
- How do you propose parsers exposing their compilers more? I mean, it'd be great if we had some kind of universal parsing infrastructure, but many languages want to be self-hosting, which defeats the point.
Yeah, and it's probably not going to be integrated into vim. It's too bad there isn't some kind of wacky heterogenous programming mode for vim that would let you implement this in something other than C.Apr 13, 2012
- I mean exposing in the form of an API that lets you visit nodes in the parse tree. Go has something of this sort, which is super nice. A few other languages do as well, but it just doesn't feel accessible.Apr 13, 2012
- Ah, I see. But even so, unless the API is socket-based (which might be needlessly complex), you'd have to ship your editor with huge amounts of code.
And in some languages, you don't know what code you're running until after type checking, which is even more complexity.
I wish it were simpler!Apr 13, 2012
- The biggest hack of this kind I've seen is the FlyMake tool for Emacs, which loads your file through the gcc frontend in "check for syntax errors" mode, and then turns that into squiggly underlines. On large projects, this isn't particularly practical.Apr 13, 2012