>> ...
>> > Vitaly Lugovsky wrote:
>> > >
>> > > P.S. Maybe, all that we need, is a RAD tool for ocaml? It can
>> > > look like a better module finder ("module name" -> "file name" is not
>> > > a good idea. Paths in Java is much better), and a lot of reusable
>> > > modules for common tasks (database, GUI)...
>>
>> There are two different problems with RADs
>>
>> * making one requires lots of work, and is not necessarily very
>> rewarding for the author, who himself can probably work
>> without. That's the reason you don't find many RADs in the open
>> source community.
>> You can find an embryo of such a thing in lablgtk for instance, but
>> I have no idea whether it will become really a full fledge RAD some
>> day.
>>
>> * it is not so clear how useful it would be for a language like ocaml.
>> Code in ocaml is much more compact than in C++ or JAVA, so that code
>> generation is not so useful in itself. I agree that this might be
>> nice for beginners, but if it is nice for beginners only, then it's
>> even harder to find the workforce.
>> ...
There are some other problems:
* RADs usually support just one language, maybe two. But when a
project consists of combinations of sh, Python, Maple or Mathematica,
ocaml, C/C++ and some Tcl/Tk code, Makefiles are the way to go.
* RADs are not programmable. Makefiles can be generated.
>> ...
>>
>> > There already is one: the lablbrowser. It's quite
>> > good functionally -- but the interface sucks.
>>
>> Name has changed, it is now ocamlbrowser.
>> As Vitaly answered, this is not a RAD, but more a kind of IDE, more
>> centered on library browsing than project building.
>>
>> As always I admire how constructive your comments are :-)
>>
>> The interface is that way because I like it that way:
>> * the main functionality is in one small window that I can keep on my
>> screen all the time.
>> * there is one window by module, because I often want to browse
>> several modules simultaneously.
>> * editor functionality is reduced to a minimum, because real
>> programmers use emacs anyway.
>>
>> ...
I agree. Using lablbrowser was quite pleasant, and there are no
annoying frills to get in the way.
Cheers,
Michael
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Apr 25 2000 - 19:05:22 MET DST