Paul Landes <lan...@mailc.net> writes: > The basic idea would be to pretty much move all the things that beanshell and > semantic currently do to Java packages. That means using things like > compilation tools that come with the JDK and other OS packages (i.e. ASM) for > parsing, code completion, wizards, templates etc. The basic idea is using > straight Java packages for anything involving Java operations. This would > really slim down the code base and make it manageable. > > ABCL (common lisp implementation) would replace the now dead Beanshell > language, and frankly, seems like a better fit since its lisp and not Java. > Another benefit to this is it already works nicely with Slime so we could get > rid of the very (IMO) complex emacs -> beanshell IPC (emacs OO!) library. Just > that would be a huge victory in my mind as I've spent hours and hours > debugging these two parts that stubbornly do not play well together (i.e. > beanshell start times and process hangups).
Beanshell was good for it's time, but is now a big problem with JDEE. Another option over ABCL would be Clojure. There is quite a big emacs community behind it now, with tools like nrepl.el nicely separate from the clojure-mode. The Java integration is also very nice and, from a quick look at ABCL, better than ABCL. It's already got some stuff we use (a Javadoc lookup for instance). The negative side is that Clojure is Eclipse Public License. My interpretation of these two licenses is that we *could* use Clojure (the GPL talks of "standard interface" which would cover this), but we would be restricted for other packages which are EPL which could not be validly linked to JDEE. > > Another idea I had is to move everything to maven so there would be maven > integration (bridged through ABCL) for compilations. If others still want to > use Ant or something else we can talk about some abstraction layer. > > Many nice useful parts of JDEE would be folded in (i.e. syntax highlight, > maven integration or Malabar mode might be folded in for this). > > I'm glad to put this on paper and if there is sufficient interest by those > WILLING TO HELP and write the CL, Java bindings, and Emacs code then I'll > continue this process. The other thing that would be worth thinking about is what we *do not* need. My own feeling is that all the template stuff can be ditched; writing these templates was always a total pain in the ass, and why bother -- yasnippet does the job. As far as I can tell, it should be possible to get maven to launch the nrepl-server. So, all the dependency stuff, classpath and all that nastiness would go. The project would be maintained in pom.xml. An ant task wouldn't be too hard. This would mean a lot of the project switching stuff could be binned. JDEE cannot compete with Eclipse or netbeans. The Emacs ecosystem, however, can, especially for people who, like myself, use Java as one of many tools. Caveat to all of this, of course, is doing the work. I'm a very occasional Java user these days, so like everyone else, can only contribute a small amount of time. Phil ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Introducing AppDynamics Lite, a free troubleshooting tool for Java/.NET Get 100% visibility into your production application - at no cost. Code-level diagnostics for performance bottlenecks with <2% overhead Download for free and get started troubleshooting in minutes. http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_ap1 _______________________________________________ jdee-devel mailing list jdee-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jdee-devel
