Descent, DLTK, Mmrnmhrm [Was: foo!(bar) ==> foo{bar} ==> foo[bar] (just Brackets)]

[Bruno Medeiros]

Ary Borenszweig wrote:
> 
> I'd like to do that in the future, but I don't know if DLTK can provide 
> all the features that Descent provides right now. It would really 
> simplify the development process, adoption of new features right from 
> DLTK, and will make it easy for newcomers help making Descent.
> 
> IMP is another possibility, but the same doubt remains...

DTLK provides most features, but yes, there are some it doesn't. For 
example there is no contribution to the Project Explorer view at all. 
(you must use DLTK's Script Explorer view instead).
But I don't see that as much of problem, because you can keep using 
parts ported from JDT to add up to the base DLTK functionality (I did 
that sometimes in Mmrnmhrm - duplicating DLTK code to override the base 
functionality), so you don't have to drop all the JDT ported code.

As for the immediate benefits that such transition would bring to 
Descent, well it depends. I was meaning to ask, how much of the indexer 
did you port from JDT? Is it working well?


-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Developer, MSc. in CS/E graduate
http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?BrunoMedeiros#D