Re: IDE, IDL feedback needed.

[John R Sheets <dusk smsi-roman com>]

Saber Karmous (DSN) wrote:

> > > P13 multiprocessor, it will always take to much time... An IDE
> > should be
> > > active not passive, the only active part of current IDE's is the
> > > debugger... Please consider my thoughts and I hope to hear more
> > about
> > > this
> >
> > What exactly do you mean by an IDE being active/passive?
> >
> > John
> >
> By active I mean that the application is running in  some kind of
> virtual machine (tricky), so that the IDE has an active role when
> testing/buidling the app. With passive I
> mean that the IDE only compiles/edits.

So the active IDE "swallows" the component applications (e.g.
editor, debugger, browser)?  The IDE pulls all the levers and
pushes all the buttons to make the application do what the IDE
wants it to do?  How does active vs. passive affect the amount of
modifications you'd have to do to the components (emacs, DDD,
etc.)?

Hmmmmm...

What exactly is the "virtual machine"?  Is it a part of the IDE
that functions almost like a mini-OS, hosting the component apps
(like through a CORBA interface)?  I guess I still don't
understand the subtleties here.  Could you give a more concrete
example?  

Thanks,
John