kdevelop (Re: Proposal to plan for "Milestone Releases" on the way to KDE4)

[Nicolas Goutte]

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 
component.

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 
rest.

> 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!