Re: DIa Port to Java

[Lars Clausen <lars raeder dk>]

On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 14:33 +0000, Aaron Trevena wrote:
> On 16/02/2008, Lars Clausen <lars raeder dk> wrote:
> > On Sat, 2008-02-16 at 08:30 -0600, Mark and Lisa Collins wrote:
> > > I am trying to find a developer, for hire, that would be interesting
> > > in building Dia in Java with some modifications.  Can you point me to
> > > someone who might eb interested?
> >
> > I have been thinking that that would be the way to go; IDEs for Java are
> > a lot better than for C.  I just so happen to have a company that does
> > programming contracting, so please let me know what you're thinking of,
> > and I'll see what we can figure out.
>
> No - that isn't the way to go.
>
> Java doesn't work with any of the native *nix toolkits or desktops,

Wrong: There is java-gnome (http://java-gnome.sourceforge.net/4.0/) and
GtJava/KDEJava (http://developer.kde.org/language-bindings/java/).

> doesn't integrate with other languages,

Not sure what to make of this -- C doesn't integrate much either.
Actually a number of languages can be compiled to Java bytecode.

>  and can be a real pig to install and run.

Unlike the automake/autoconf system, which never gives us any trouble at
all.  I've seen easy-to-install Java programs and bitch-to-install C
programs.

> All the huge amount of grief involved in java isn't worth being able
> to use a couple of Eclipse functions.

It's not just a couple of Eclipse functions.  It's the fact that the IDE
actually supports what I want to do: Finding usages, moving and
renaming, extracting methods, noticing dangerous practices, helping
write API docs, and numerous other things.  After 4 1/2 years using
IntelliJ, I feel crippled when I move back to Emacs.  Not that I can't
use what Emacs gives me (and add more myself), but there's a world of
difference between the two.  And C is just not structured enough to
allow that level of support.

-Lars