kdevelop (Re: Proposal to plan for "Milestone Releases" on the way to KDE4)
nicolasg at snafu.de
Fri Jan 27 15:25:44 GMT 2006
On Thursday 26 January 2006 21:11, Alexander Dymo wrote:
> On Thursday 26 January 2006 11:35, Nicolas Goutte wrote:
> > The reason why I prefer simple editors is perhaps my personal history. My
> > first editor was probably the one of Turbo Pascal (Wordstar-like) (or was
> > it MS-DOS' edlin?) and on Unix (probably BSD), my first contact was ed!
> > (vi came only later)
> Well, KDevelop is also built around the text editor ;) We can embed
> any editor you like.
Sorry, that was not what I meant. I do not mind to use Kate as KDE text
I meant more that when one has switched many times the used text editor, then
at the end one tries to find only the basic features and to live without the
> And what if we load as fast as editor and have
> advances features you can use times-to-times?
> > Most of the time what an editor can do, the next editor can do it too.
> > But as advanced the features are the less they are in other editors. So
> > advanced IDE have features particular to them.
> But what if IDE provides you those advances features that you exactly need?
> If you tell us what features you expect, we can make you feel home inside
> an IDE.
As I have not used KDevelop, it is indeed not easy for me to tell what would
be needed so that I would use it.
Many critics in this thread remind me of what I have thought (or still think)
of KBabel compared to editing a PO file in a text editor, like Kate. (Yes,
KBabel too is a more-than-an-editor and it has projects too.)
For example having to set a project for editing a single file, was also a
(indirect) critic of KBabel. On the other side, if you work heavily with it,
you might get faster than with a text editor and I assume that KDevelop could
be the same.
Have a nice day!
More information about the kde-core-devel