From: "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <znmeb@...>
Date: 2007-04-15T07:59:01+09:00
Subject: Re: IDEs, syntactic vs. semantic highlighting, etc. (was Re: What is your favourite IDE? Eclipse DLTK!)

Chad Perrin wrote:
>> But what I'd *really* like is a language and an implementation of that 
>> language that *was* an IDE! The closest thing to that I've ever seen is 
>> the intricate entwining of Lisp and Emacs, and that, in a kind of 
>> linear, one-dimensional, "auditory" way, is the core concept. But expand 
>> that -- data structures other than the linked list, two-dimensional and 
>> three-dimensional diagrams, color, stereo sound, animation. And, of 
>> course, it needs to be open source. :)
>>     
>
> Isn't that what Smalltalk does?  It combines the language and the IDE in
> one convenient package.  I'm sure I've seen a couple other languages do
> the same sort of thing, but at the moment I'm drawing a blank on what
> they might have been, specifically.
>   
I don't know about Smalltalk in general, but that certainly describes 
Squeak. So maybe it's been done. I gave up trying to learn Squeak -- 
perhaps I should try again. :)
> Anyway, I'd rather code Lisp in Vim any day of the week.
>   
Compared to what? Emacs? Vim has come a long way, and I must confess I 
never learned Emacs, but if I had to do serious Lisp programming, I'd 
for sure bite the bullet and immerse myself in Emacs. Actually, the 
reason I learned "vi" instead of "emacs" to begin with is that the 
system folks told us not to use "emacs" because it was a memory hog. :)


-- 
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky, FBG, AB, PTA, PGS, MS, MNLP, NST, ACMC(P)
http://borasky-research.net/

If God had meant for carrots to be eaten cooked, He would have given rabbits fire.