Gerhard Häring <g...@ghaering.de> writes: > Rhodri James wrote: >> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 19:20:27 -0000, NiklasRTZ <nikla...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Dear experts, >>> Since no py IDE I found has easy hg access. IDEs PIDA and Eric claim >>> Mercurial support not found i.e. buttons to clone, commit and push to >>> repositories to define dev env dvcs, editor and deployment all in 1. >> >> I don't really understand this urge to cram everything into a single >> program, since that inevitably leads to compromises that will >> compromise
Huh? Cram what? Nothing is crammed into anything. The IDE/Editor is merely programmed to hook into the external tools >> just how much of Mercurial's useful and interesting functionality you >> can get at. Still, if you really must, Emacs (and presumably vim) seems >> to be capable of working with most source control systems. > > I prefer the commandline tools, too. > > FWIW, Eclipse supports Mercurial through > http://www.vectrace.com/mercurialeclipse/ > > -- Gerhard Why would you prefer the command line tools in a shell when the same tools can be used in a way which makes navigating the output so much easier? It strikes me as a kind of intransigence. it's a common misconception that IDEs use their own tools all the time. They don't. They integrate the very same tools. e.g Why the hell would I drop to a command line to diff a file with a back version in GIT when I can do the same in the buffer in emacs with a single hot key? Why would I pipe the output of compile into a file then open that file when a single hot key can fire off the SAME compiler and then list the errors in an emacs buffer and another hot key can take me directly to the source lines in question? Living in the past has its mements, but really. e.g I have pylint working live in python buffers. Big time saver. Similar with C. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
