On Thu, 2008-01-03 at 04:02 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Yes, we actually send elisp across the wire for Emacs to execute. In > > addition to commands, we found it necessary to be able to respond > > asynchronously to Emacs events (e.g. when a new buffer has been opened). > > Oh joy. > > I feel much the same now as when someone told me about pyrex. At the > time I had some vague ideas about translating python-looking code into > c. Imagine my joy when I saw that pyrex had solved problems I never > new existed. Suddenly I had a new tool that already was *much* better > than I would have produced on my own. > > pida may be the 'master tool' that allows developers to concentrate on > what they do best. For Leo, that means outline stuff, and nothing > else. In particular, Leo supports (but not too well) almost all the > features on Robin's mission impossible list, but *none* of those items > is what Leo does better than any other editor/ide. > > My dream is that for every possible editor feature there would be one > or two developers who 'own' that feature, and who 'provide' that > feature to the rest of us. The owners of a feature are those who have > solved problems that the rest of us don't know exist. At present, I > feel like a jack of all trades, and a master of one. I really would > like to use other people's design and code. > > Enough for now. I've got to give pida much more study before I say > more.
Well I have no doubt you could build something easily as good as PIDA, it has a long way to go. But it would make me very happy if the general Pyxides direction was towards something PIDA-like, because then I would use it. The main problem I have with PIDA fitting into the Pyxides movement is that its PyGTK, and almost everything else seems wxPython orientated. I hope that whatever happens will eventually be GUI agnostic. Ali
