I'm sorry too, for jumping to conclusions basically. I guess I got defensive when you said that it was "awful". I see what you mean though.
The problem with the integration has been partially fixed, as I announced in this post: https://groups.google.com/d/topic/clojure/oBCPbPIkPL8/discussion It always turns bad when I get riled up, dammit. :D Jonathan On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 11:11 PM, Steven Degutis <sbdegu...@gmail.com>wrote: > Whoa whoa whoa, hold on. I'm not talking crap. > > It's awesome that you're releasing OSS for us to use. And just because it > isn't ready for me to use in production yet, that's not saying anything bad > about it. > > And I opened the issue on paredit trusting that either you'll either > eventually get to it or someone else will. I'm not at all complaining about > the time it's taking. I even tried my hand at it (because I know pull > requests are better than issues) but I'm no Python expert and I had a hard > time following ST2's API docs. > > And I shouldn't have said "lispindent is awful". That was irresponsible of > me. I was in a rush but that's no excuse. What I meant to say is "I heard > that lispindent has serious problems integrating with other features of ST2 > but I don't remember how and can't find that gist where it was explained". > > Sorry. > > -Steven > > > On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 2:34 PM, Jonathan Fischer Friberg < > odysso...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > Yes. See this part of his >> > readme<https://github.com/odyssomay/paredit#implementation-status> where >> he says it's missing some important functions. Plus see this >> issue<https://github.com/odyssomay/paredit/issues/16> I >> opened for him about other important missing commands. >> >> I'm not ignoring that issue, but I don't have all the time in the world. >> You also have to consider that the missing commands you asked for are not >> documented anywhere (at all). This doesn't mean that I don't want to >> implement them, but it means that they are not exactly on the top of my >> list of "things to fix". I admit that I have been putting it off for a >> little bit, I apologize for that. >> >> It's not a perfect implementation either by any means. There's a lot of >> edge cases to consider. If you find anything that isn't correct, open an >> issue! >> >> https://github.com/odyssomay/paredit/issues >> >> > And for the record lispindent is awful, I remember someone recently >> explaining why in a gist comment, either tim baldridge or tomjack (or >> someone else who goes in IRC a lot). >> >> ok? Maybe care to explain what's so awful about it? An issue is the >> perfect place to get things like this fixed and it's much more productive >> and friendly than talking shit on the internet. >> >> https://github.com/odyssomay/sublime-lispindent/issues >> >> Jonathan >> >> On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 9:22 PM, Greg <g...@kinostudios.com> wrote: >> >>> Oh, some other thoughts/requests/ideas: >>> >>> - Xocde-style refactoring for renaming symbols inline in the current >>> scope. Sublime-style renaming would be OK too. >>> - For the jump-to-symbol stuff, don't actually change the view to the >>> other symbol. Perhaps make an alternate command that lets you see that >>> source but in a hover/floaty/popup window so that you don't have to >>> navigate back to where you were. >>> >>> -- >>> Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also >>> sharing with the NSA. >>> >>> On Jul 27, 2013, at 3:10 PM, Greg <g...@kinostudios.com> wrote: >>> >>> Colin: >>> >>> I think ST has a good business model via its constant nags. $70 USD to >>> get it to STFU and support the developer seems fair, while allowing those >>> who can't afford it to use it and tolerate the nags. >>> >>> If you don't give people a way to use your IDE for free then most people >>> won't use it because there are plenty of free or nearly-free alternatives >>> out there that are already great (like Sublime). Having a large user-base >>> will help you in the long run, because without on your IDE won't have a >>> community behind it to support word-of-mouth and things like plugins, etc. >>> >>> That said, I'd love an improved version of La Clojure for IntelliJ! >>> >>> Here's a wish list if you decide to go for it: >>> >>> - Perfect support for Leiningen, including support for all the crazy >>> customizations and sub-projects. >>> - Bug-free or fewer bugs. The current Leiningen plugin has some bugs >>> where it prevents you from adding new jar files to the module (sometimes, >>> not always). >>> - Fantastic support for jumping to the definition of any symbol in your >>> leiningen project, whether it's Java source or Clojure source. >>> - Support for ClojureScript. >>> - Auto-complete of the Xcode variety, where for the selected >>> function/method in the drop down list you are shown all the documentation >>> for it. >>> >>> And, assuming you implemented all of the above, then it'd also be nice >>> to auto-import namespaces (similar to how IntelliJ already does it for Java >>> source). >>> >>> Cheers! >>> Greg >>> >>> -- >>> Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also >>> sharing with the NSA. >>> >>> On Jul 27, 2013, at 7:54 AM, Colin Fleming <colin.mailingl...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I was planning to wait a little longer before going public, but since >>> it's pretty relevant to the other IntelliJ thread going on at the moment I >>> thought I'd jump in. For the last couple of months of happy unemployment >>> I've been working on a fork of La Clojure which is now about 70% migrated >>> to Clojure and significantly improved. It's a lot of work to develop a tool >>> like this, and one of the options I'm considering is starting a company to >>> develop it as a commercial product - JetBrains have never maintained >>> development of La Clojure very actively. I've been doing a little market >>> research but there's really not much data around about whether there are >>> enough people working with Clojure to sustain a product like that, and also >>> the community is currently very focused on open source. >>> >>> One problem is that the IDE space is already fairly fractured - there's >>> Emacs and CCW, Clooj, Sublime Text and the promise of Light Table at some >>> point, and of course the current public version of La Clojure. But there's >>> still not a great option for something that's powerful but easy to use - >>> CCW is probably the closest thing to this right now. However I think it's >>> telling that a large fraction of people in the State of Clojure 2012 survey >>> still identified development tools as a major pain point. >>> >>> I think that the IntelliJ platform is a fantastic base to build >>> something like this on. Clojure as a language makes it pretty challenging >>> to develop a lot of the great functionality that JetBrains are famous for, >>> but I think there's scope to do a lot of great things. Certainly for mixed >>> Clojure/Java projects it would be difficult to beat, but even for Clojure >>> only projects I can imagine a lot of fantastic functionality built on their >>> infrastructure. My plan would be to release a standalone IDE and a plugin >>> for people using IntelliJ Ultimate for web dev, Ruby/Python or whatever. >>> Since it's mostly Clojure now (and I'm migrating what's left as I get to >>> it) there's a real possibility of a Clojure plugin/extension API. I >>> envision charging PyCharm/RubyMine type prices, say $200 for company >>> licenses or $100 for individual developers. >>> >>> So, I'd love to hear what people think. I'd appreciate it if we could >>> stay away from the politics of open source vs proprietary - several people >>> have told me privately that they'd rather use OSS and that's fine, >>> proprietary isn't for everyone. What I'd like to know is if the idea is >>> appealing to many people here? >>> >>> In case it's a concern for anyone, I've discussed this with JetBrains. >>> >>> Thanks for any feedback, >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Colin >>> >>> -- >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "Clojure" group. >>> To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com >>> Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with >>> your first post. >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en >>> --- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "Clojure" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> -- >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups "Clojure" group. >> To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com >> Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with >> your first post. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en >> --- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Clojure" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> >> >> > > -- > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Clojure" group. > To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com > Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with > your first post. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Clojure" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
