On Dienstag 29 Mai 2012, Vojtech Kral wrote: > On 2012-05-29 15:08, Geronimo Ma. Hernandez wrote: > > What you ask is probably impossible and it doesn't make much sense > either.
Sorry, but statements like that prevent real software evolution. I learned: if a problem is to big to see all aspects, cut it down into smaller parts and then you reach the point, where anything is clear and possible. > It seems to me that in all your requests you are basically asking for > an IDE that would enable you to develop C++ exactly the same way you are > used to develop Java. So what's wrong with that. Java did not arise only by simplicity of the language, but also by incredibly tools like eclipse and netbeans, that cut you off most grunt work. What eclipse takes out from living syntax-tree is unique. ... and I'm quite sure, that QtCreator could offer a big bunch of features based on living syntax-tree. I believe, that everything, that could be managed by machines, I don't have to care about and for so I don't like to have to waste my time on such tasks. I have a multi project built in java with several "executables" and "libraries" some of them used as shared library. Neither the multiproject approach, nor the shared libraries are supported by java-world. So I wrote my own build-system with ant-scripts and wrote my own library loader to be able to use java-libs as runtime loaded library. Looking back, the most important barrier was to start. After that, there was nothing magic or impossible big problems. I'm quite sure, if you lower the barrier for entrylevel C++-developers, C++ could get more success only caused on your work. So whats wrong in having dreams? > Quite frankly, I'd much rather see QtC developers dealing with stuff > that _really_ matters, such as integrating Clang and/or implementing C++11 > code model features, et cetera, I guess, there are a lot of developers working on QtCreator and not all can work in improving language parser. So there's a lot, that can be done beside that and sometimes a little new feature boosts the whole community. > instead of turning QtC into a NetBeans or Eclipse clone ;-) No, I never want that. Eclipse is of cause bloated and very much effort has been introduced to make code unusable outside of eclipse. Also there has been lot of manpower wasted on obfuscating code. That was quite common in the old 80th ... - nothing to learn from. And less to copy from! But after all, netbeans, eclipse and even kdevelop have some nice features. And if those features make live easier, why not go for it? kind regards Gero _______________________________________________ Qt-creator mailing list Qt-creator@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator
