Re: IDE, IDL feedback needed.

On Wed, Jun 24, 1998 at 12:47:48AM -0700, Samuel Ziegler wrote:

> My concept for the IDL began with the thought that a file is the
> atomic unit of an IDE. Editors / debuggers / source control /
> etc... all deal with things in terms of files. Also, the only other
> piece of info needed to be passed around the IDE, in terms of files,
> is a line number.  Ie, set a break point at line X... the current line
> of execution is  Y...  Everything else is either dealt with within a
> given piece of the IDE (ie editing a line of of the file) or by the
> operating system (ie a file is read only).  Now this may be an
> incorrect assumption, but it is the one I've been using so far.  
I think it might be, but I'm not sure. What I'm missing in all this is
a GUI Builder. If you include that, don't you need to be able to communicate
on a per function basis, not per file? Consider changing a name of a function,
you wouldn't want the builder to have knowledge of the number of the line of
code where the function was declared and the line where the function is
implemented. Would you need function-level communication for that, or could
you get away with just giving the new and the old name, and have the editor

Martijn van Beers

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]