Skip to main content


Eclipse Community Forums
Forum Search:

Search      Help    Register    Login    Home
Home » Eclipse Projects » Dynamic Languages Toolkit (DLTK) » useful dltk documentation?
useful dltk documentation? [message #8394] Tue, 17 July 2007 22:11 Go to next message
Eclipse UserFriend
Originally posted by: invalid_094857234.hotmail.com

Hello everybody,
I am wondering whether the dltk project is still active? What is the
developers' intention?

From the initial announcements I got the impression that they want to
provide a system which allows programmers easily to integrate dynamic
language interpreters. What I see is little example code without sufficient
documentation to use dltk as a TOOLKIT.

Of course, the Tcl example may be useful for Tcl programmers - but why not
rename dltk to tclide? It is neither universal for dynamic languages nor is
it usable as a toolkit, both because of the lack of documentation.

Is there some reason, why the documentation (listed in the project plan) is
not published? This project seems to rank way behind the professionality of
all other eclipse projects. In my opinion either the project plan should
honestly say that no documentation will exist before 201?, or the
documentation should be published according to open source standards, or
the project should be removed.

Mark
Re: useful dltk documentation? [message #8425 is a reply to message #8394] Wed, 18 July 2007 12:52 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eclipse UserFriend
Originally posted by: regenmacher.online.de

Cool down.
I'm NOT with dltk - but as i understand it - dltk is in incubation-state
(=baby-project)
So be pacient. If you realy can't wait, then
CVS, pserver, Host: dev.eclipse.org, Repository Path: /cvsroot/technoloy
HEAD -> org.eclipse.dltk -> core

"Mark" <invalid_094857234@hotmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:f7je7o$du6$1@build.eclipse.org...
> Hello everybody,
> I am wondering whether the dltk project is still active? What is the
> developers' intention?
>
> From the initial announcements I got the impression that they want to
> provide a system which allows programmers easily to integrate dynamic
> language interpreters. What I see is little example code without
> sufficient
> documentation to use dltk as a TOOLKIT.
>
> Of course, the Tcl example may be useful for Tcl programmers - but why not
> rename dltk to tclide? It is neither universal for dynamic languages nor
> is
> it usable as a toolkit, both because of the lack of documentation.
>
> Is there some reason, why the documentation (listed in the project plan)
> is
> not published? This project seems to rank way behind the professionality
> of
> all other eclipse projects. In my opinion either the project plan should
> honestly say that no documentation will exist before 201?, or the
> documentation should be published according to open source standards, or
> the project should be removed.
>
> Mark
Re: useful dltk documentation? [message #8456 is a reply to message #8425] Wed, 18 July 2007 15:10 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Jae Gangemi is currently offline Jae GangemiFriend
Messages: 28
Registered: July 2009
Junior Member
the dltk project is extremely active (disclosue, not w/ the group) -
but as michael said, it is still in the incubator stage.

the tcl, ruby, and python (well, python slightly less) are all useful
examples of how to integreate w/ the core framework. i'm working on a
perl implementation and i use those other projecs as reference points
all the time.

i can tell you that even if there was source documentation, you'd
still need to dig into the internals of those plugins to see exactly
how things work.

the dltk folks recognize that the documentation is lacking and are
working to resolve the issue. at the same time, feel free to submit
patches that help add to the documentation - it's one of the beauties
of this project and open source.

and if you have a question, ask (check out the dev mailing list as well).

On 2007-07-18 08:52:05 -0400, "Michael Strothjohann"
<regenmacher@online.de> said:

> Cool down.
> I'm NOT with dltk - but as i understand it - dltk is in
> incubation-state (=baby-project)
> So be pacient. If you realy can't wait, then
> CVS, pserver, Host: dev.eclipse.org, Repository Path: /cvsroot/technoloy
> HEAD -> org.eclipse.dltk -> core
>
> "Mark" <invalid_094857234@hotmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> news:f7je7o$du6$1@build.eclipse.org...
>> Hello everybody,
>> I am wondering whether the dltk project is still active? What is the
>> developers' intention?
>>
>> From the initial announcements I got the impression that they want to
>> provide a system which allows programmers easily to integrate dynamic
>> language interpreters. What I see is little example code without sufficient
>> documentation to use dltk as a TOOLKIT.
>>
>> Of course, the Tcl example may be useful for Tcl programmers - but why not
>> rename dltk to tclide? It is neither universal for dynamic languages nor is
>> it usable as a toolkit, both because of the lack of documentation.
>>
>> Is there some reason, why the documentation (listed in the project plan) is
>> not published? This project seems to rank way behind the professionality of
>> all other eclipse projects. In my opinion either the project plan should
>> honestly say that no documentation will exist before 201?, or the
>> documentation should be published according to open source standards, or
>> the project should be removed.
>>
>> Mark


--
-jae
Re: useful dltk documentation? [message #9790 is a reply to message #8456] Thu, 19 July 2007 16:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eclipse UserFriend
Originally posted by: mark_melvin.amis.com

I keep hearing of this mystical Python feature but I can't find it =

anywhere in CVS. If I wanted to look at it and perhaps contribute, wher=
e =

would I find it?

Mark.

On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 11:10:35 -0400, Jae Gangemi <jgangemi@gmail.com> wro=
te:

>
> the dltk project is extremely active (disclosue, not w/ the group) -=
=

> but as michael said, it is still in the incubator stage.
>
> the tcl, ruby, and python (well, python slightly less) are all usefu=
l =

> examples of how to integreate w/ the core framework. i'm working on a =
=

> perl implementation and i use those other projecs as reference points =
=

> all the time.
>
> i can tell you that even if there was source documentation, you'd =

> still need to dig into the internals of those plugins to see exactly h=
ow =

> things work.
>
> the dltk folks recognize that the documentation is lacking and are =

> working to resolve the issue. at the same time, feel free to submit =

> patches that help add to the documentation - it's one of the beauties =
of =

> this project and open source.
>
> and if you have a question, ask (check out the dev mailing list as =

> well).
>
> On 2007-07-18 08:52:05 -0400, "Michael Strothjohann" =

> <regenmacher@online.de> said:
>
>> Cool down.
>> I'm NOT with dltk - but as i understand it - dltk is in =

>> incubation-state (=3Dbaby-project)
>> So be pacient. If you realy can't wait, then
>> CVS, pserver, Host: dev.eclipse.org, Repository Path: =

>> /cvsroot/technoloy
>> HEAD -> org.eclipse.dltk -> core
>> "Mark" <invalid_094857234@hotmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag =

>> news:f7je7o$du6$1@build.eclipse.org...
>>> Hello everybody,
>>> I am wondering whether the dltk project is still active? What is the=

>>> developers' intention?
>>> From the initial announcements I got the impression that they want =
to
>>> provide a system which allows programmers easily to integrate dynami=
c
>>> language interpreters. What I see is little example code without =

>>> sufficient
>>> documentation to use dltk as a TOOLKIT.
>>> Of course, the Tcl example may be useful for Tcl programmers - but =
=

>>> why not
>>> rename dltk to tclide? It is neither universal for dynamic languages=
=

>>> nor is
>>> it usable as a toolkit, both because of the lack of documentation.
>>> Is there some reason, why the documentation (listed in the project =
=

>>> plan) is
>>> not published? This project seems to rank way behind the =

>>> professionality of
>>> all other eclipse projects. In my opinion either the project plan =

>>> should
>>> honestly say that no documentation will exist before 201?, or the
>>> documentation should be published according to open source standards=
, =

>>> or
>>> the project should be removed.
>>> Mark
>
>



-- =

Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
Re: useful dltk documentation? [message #9813 is a reply to message #9790] Thu, 19 July 2007 19:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eclipse UserFriend
Originally posted by: regenmacher.online.de

As Mikhail Kalugin pointed out, there is a (very) short wiki about the
basics, using Python to demonstrate dltk s core functionality:

http://wiki.eclipse.org/DLTK_IDE_Guide.

Related source:
http://us.xored.com/~haiodo/org.eclipse.dltk.examples.python .zip

I'm not with dltk, but as i understand they are using anlr 2.x.y.z witch is
an epl-violation. Or it is a fast moving target. Or both. So it is not found
in eclipse-CVS.

michael
Re: useful dltk documentation? [message #9879 is a reply to message #8456] Thu, 19 July 2007 21:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eclipse UserFriend
Originally posted by: invalid_094857234.hotmail.com

Jae Gangemi wrote:

>
> the dltk project is extremely active (disclosue, not w/ the group) -
> but as michael said, it is still in the incubator stage.
>
> the tcl, ruby, and python (well, python slightly less) are all useful
> examples of how to integreate w/ the core framework. i'm working on a
> perl implementation and i use those other projecs as reference points
> all the time.

This is exactly the point. There is no sense in developing more and more
examples unless the toolkit itself is stable and documented.

> i can tell you that even if there was source documentation, you'd
> still need to dig into the internals of those plugins to see exactly
> how things work.

This suggestion is like telling someone to upgrade a computer without giving
him the screwdriver to open the case.

> the dltk folks recognize that the documentation is lacking and are
> working to resolve the issue. at the same time, feel free to submit
> patches that help add to the documentation

Add to WHICH documentation? If there was something like 4 pages of well
structured documentation, it would be fun to work with and document on
dltk. The wiki is a bad joke, no documentation. Right now the dltk
initiators are wasting all other developers' time and grabbing every piece
of code from them they can get.

Have fun!
Re: useful dltk documentation? [message #9947 is a reply to message #9879] Thu, 19 July 2007 22:33 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eclipse UserFriend
Originally posted by: regenmacher.online.de

If you are not satisfied with dltk and there is no way to change this, what
about Safari (IDE-Generator, IBM) with user-doc, (very) short introduction
to lpg (LALR parser) and polyglot (an extensible Compiler Framework for
Java).

michael
Re: useful dltk documentation? [message #10152 is a reply to message #9879] Fri, 20 July 2007 13:09 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Jae Gangemi is currently offline Jae GangemiFriend
Messages: 28
Registered: July 2009
Junior Member
wow - you're angry.

i don't feel that my time has been wasted in the least bit. i've
managed to put together an implementation for perl, and submit patches
that introduced new features based upon all the documention that is
there today, asking questions, and tracing through source code.

so rather then bitching, why don't you try doing the same, rather
then waiting to be spoon fed.

On 2007-07-19 17:58:36 -0400, Mark <invalid_094857234@hotmail.com> said:

> Jae Gangemi wrote:
>
>>
>> the dltk project is extremely active (disclosue, not w/ the group) -
>> but as michael said, it is still in the incubator stage.
>>
>> the tcl, ruby, and python (well, python slightly less) are all useful
>> examples of how to integreate w/ the core framework. i'm working on a
>> perl implementation and i use those other projecs as reference points
>> all the time.
>
> This is exactly the point. There is no sense in developing more and more
> examples unless the toolkit itself is stable and documented.
>
>> i can tell you that even if there was source documentation, you'd
>> still need to dig into the internals of those plugins to see exactly
>> how things work.
>
> This suggestion is like telling someone to upgrade a computer without giving
> him the screwdriver to open the case.
>
>> the dltk folks recognize that the documentation is lacking and are
>> working to resolve the issue. at the same time, feel free to submit
>> patches that help add to the documentation
>
> Add to WHICH documentation? If there was something like 4 pages of well
> structured documentation, it would be fun to work with and document on
> dltk. The wiki is a bad joke, no documentation. Right now the dltk
> initiators are wasting all other developers' time and grabbing every piece
> of code from them they can get.
>
> Have fun!


--
-jae
Re: useful dltk documentation? [message #11367 is a reply to message #8394] Mon, 23 July 2007 19:31 Go to previous message
Mark Howe is currently offline Mark HoweFriend
Messages: 14
Registered: July 2009
Junior Member
Even a minuscule amount of research would tell you that the DLTK project is very active. Look at the
change log since the beginning of the year. I am actively building on top of DLTK and specifically
the Ruby DLTK (I am not part of the DLTK group) and the amount of work that the DLTK group has put
into this project over the last 8 months is phenomenal. They are very responsive to suggestions and
to patches etc. The project is clearly meant to support a wide set of dynamic type languages. There
is a large amount of generic code and then specific personalities built on top of that generic code.
True the documentation is lacking, but it would be pointless to do a lot of documentation while the
the project in such an early stage, it would be out of date within weeks. DLTK is becoming more
stable and documentation is certainly something that should be taken more seriously now.

(And if you are going to use an anonymous name how about picking a name from tolkien or some other
fantasy so that those of us who are actively participating with our real names aren't maligned :>)

Mark Howe


Mark wrote:
> Hello everybody,
> I am wondering whether the dltk project is still active? What is the
> developers' intention?
>
> From the initial announcements I got the impression that they want to
> provide a system which allows programmers easily to integrate dynamic
> language interpreters. What I see is little example code without sufficient
> documentation to use dltk as a TOOLKIT.
>
> Of course, the Tcl example may be useful for Tcl programmers - but why not
> rename dltk to tclide? It is neither universal for dynamic languages nor is
> it usable as a toolkit, both because of the lack of documentation.
>
> Is there some reason, why the documentation (listed in the project plan) is
> not published? This project seems to rank way behind the professionality of
> all other eclipse projects. In my opinion either the project plan should
> honestly say that no documentation will exist before 201?, or the
> documentation should be published according to open source standards, or
> the project should be removed.
>
> Mark
Previous Topic:Another DLTK Mini-HOWTO coming soon
Next Topic:Using DLTK plugin framework for implementing language editor
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Tue Apr 23 10:26:49 GMT 2024

Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03972 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 3.0.2.
Copyright ©2001-2010 FUDforum Bulletin Board Software

Back to the top