On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 3:04 AM, RonnyPfannschmidt <
ronny.pfannschm...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Jan 15, 10:57 am, Ali Afshar <aafs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi, as a user, I would be *really* keen on seeing good Java support,
> > or any Java support. In my opinion it is a huge missing link, as
> > although Java is not my primary development language, it is hard to
> > live without using it occasionally.
> >
> > I personally wouldn't get hung up on having the first iteration be
> > perfect, using Jython etc..
> well, using jython would only be required for reasonable invocation of
> java programm parts
> the rest whole thing will require a good amount of iterations,
> since java support is certainly a complex feature
> i'm looking forward to seeing it happen :)

Right, we're aiming at implementing the simplest thing that could possibly
work. Part of the problem is that there aren't a lot of stand alone java
applications to support IDE features. We may end up ripping code out of
Eclipse, Netbeans, etc. for refactoring, code checking etc.

This is one area where we could use some help. If anyone knows of libraries
for doing IDE like things with Java that we could use, that would be
fantastic. Otherwise we'll just slowly add features from scratch.

> >
> > 2010/1/15 RonnyPfannschmidt <ronny.pfannschm...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > On Jan 15, 5:04 am, Ryan Freckleton <ryan.freckle...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> Hello PIDA developers and community,
> >
> > >> One of my coworkers (Tim Flink, who wrote this list earlier) and I are
> > >> interested in developing Java support for PIDA with the goal of using
> it as
> > >> our primary java IDE.
> >
> > >> If we succeed in adding this support, would you be interested in
> receiving
> > >> our patches into mainline? We're planning doing our work in public
> branches
> > >> on bitbucket and keeping them synced with main.
> > > Yup, we are interested
> >
> > >> This assumes that our code is up to par with quality, tests, etc.
> > > Tests is still a big grey area, quality is a moving target we attack
> > > via peer-review.
> > > I'd happy to provide additional review for you, if requested.
> >
> > > The basic premise Sounds fine, we might want to investigate on running
> > > java-related things via a execnet->jython bridge.
> > > We currently lack a concept of generic build systems, so currently it
> > > would be necessary to indirect via puilder
> > > (our simple builtin task-based build tool)
> > > At some point i plan to make the Project support build tool agnostic,
> > > so java based Projects could directly use ant/maven.

Glad to hear it! We'll definitely take you up on the offer for additional
code reviews once we have some code.

Holy cow, execnet is awesome! I didn't know that the PyPy project had
created such a thing, most of the bridges I've seen between Java and Python
use the shell and are generally dead projects :(. This is something
definitely worth looking into.

Thanks for the tip. Do you have any design constraints or ideas of how to
make the build system more generic? We may end up getting it before you.

Based on the level of support we're getting, I think that it would be useful
for us to do a "design outline" and share it with the list of what we plan
on doing. That way we can get some feedback before we start.

Thanks again!
--Ryan E. Freckleton
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PIDA" group.
To post to this group, send an email to p...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pida+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pida?hl=en-GB.

Reply via email to