I see the benefits of piggybacking on the development efforts of existing IDE's, but like Henry would prefer to keep the IDE nice and small and relatively simple.
I like the fact that implementing the IDE in J provides lots of real-life example code. Also as well as being an example of eating your own dog food, I imagine it provides quite a useful "test suite" for any changes to the GUI interface! Ric > From: Henry Rich > > I use the GL stuff a lot, and I'm trembling at the thought that it > might > not be supported compatibly. But that will be revealed in due time. > > I tried Eclipse with my Java class last year & I hated it. It was big > and slow. It would be awful to be stuck with that every time I wanted > to write J code. I like the IDE just as it is - not that it's so > great, > but I know it, and it meets my needs. > > Henry Rich > > Dan Bron wrote: > > I wrote: > >> But I don't know how much thought or effort has already gone into > the new > >> IDE, or even what its goals are. > > > > I may not specifically know its goals, but thinking about it more, I > > realize I do know some of its constraints. > > > > The IDE actually wears two hats. It's a code development tool *and* > a > > solution component. It actually provides some of J's functionality. > > Specifically wd (including timers), sockets, a COM server, and all > that GL > > stuff I never use. > > > > It probably won't be easy to port all that functionality to Eclipse. > > Particularly if JSoftware is aiming at any reasonable level of > backwards > > compatibility. > > > > That said, while it wouldn't be easy, it would be possible, and the > > benefits may outweigh the costs. But that's not my call to make. > > > > -Dan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
