[Kc] May Meeting

James Carman developer at peelle.org
Wed May 7 09:56:27 PDT 2008

Difficulty of implementation is an interesting point I had not thought of. The Intellisence(microsoft term) is a nice feature, and I would consider it a welcome addition for my Perl coding even if it can only auto complete package definitions. Another feature of microsoft's intellisence that was nice for newer programmers was a library intelligence. If a programmer started using a feature/class that was not imported it would tell them the library they need to use it, and with just a click add that library at the top of their program.

In some sense I am comparing apples and oranges, and asking for an Aplorane. Thanks for the responces guys.

James Carman

>in my experience having worked with visual studio as well as the "my
>OS is my IDE"
>combination of xterm and gvim windows, and lots of Makefile targets,
>the only thing
>that an IDE provides that would be a nice-to-have in gvim is flexible
>keyword completion
>that knows about the valid symbols available at any point.  Having
>this prevents cycles
>of compile/fix due to miscapitalizations, for instance.  That feature
>is really the I in IDE
>in my opinion, as the editing tool must know the language being
>written in well enough
>to provide the correct subset of available symbols in any context.
>Making that happen in Perl would be massively tricky, as the possible
>method names
>that can follow an object are open-ended and late-bound.  The best
>possible practical
>situation would be to be aware of stylistic conventions and package
>namespaces, as well
>as some kind of heuristic about what package an obejct is blessed
>into, which is also
>not available information at editing time (unlike in C/C++, where it
>can be found in
>unambiguous and exhaustive declarations.)
>Does Komodo provide method name suggestions?
>kc mailing list
>kc at pm.org

More information about the kc mailing list