Re: [ease-dev] [eclipse-scripting-dev] EASE vs Eclipse Workbench (e4 or

[Christian Pontesegger <christian.pontesegger@xxxxxx>]

On 22.08.2014 15:48, James Watkins-Harvey wrote:

Good. So I think we can conclude that pre-e4 compatibility is indeed a wish, but that the main focus is definitely about the new e4 model.

Concretely, I suggest that the main UI plugin might be built around the e4 model, and therefore exploit most e4 goodies, namely behaviour annotations dependency injections, css, and so on. A backward compatibility plugin might be created afterward, probably based on org.eclipse.e4.tools.compat or whatever other approach that will be appropriate.

James, which UI components do you have in mind? Currently we have the shell, script explorer, model explorer and a partly implementation of toolbar and menu contributions. These things are already in place, so I would not re-implement them as long as there exist no radical ideas for features that can't be done with the 3.x mechanisms.

Personally I think that the UI capabilities of e4 are a nice to have, but do not bring much benefit.Instead I would love to implement the event broker for all kinds of messaging and to get rid of the listener concept. No more listeners for script engine creations, code executions, scripts registering for the Script Explorer... that would be nice. Still event broker means e4 exclusively.

The e4 model for views with DI and its styling capabilities is quite nice, but so far e4 was lacking one crucial feature: to define view extensions that work without knowing your application model. I know there have been some efforts to make this work with Luna, yet I am not aware of the current status. As the scripting components not only target the Eclipse IDE itself, but also users RCP applications we should not have any hard dependencies to the e4 workbench application model.

So which UI components do you think should be implemented the e4 way?

regards
Christian