| Re: [eclipse.org-architecture-council] Next Meeting? |
|
On 03/28/2016 04:31 PM, Doug Schaefer
wrote:
I disagree on that point (despite the fact that I fully agree with the interest of language services, factorizing a lot, importing textmate grammars... whatever makes integration of a new language easier). As I read you, here is how I translate it: "let's just do the same as Sublime it's enough". Well, if Eclipse IDE doesn't provide more assistance and a better productivity than Sublime & co, it will simply become irrelevant. Why users would start an heavy war machine when a trivial editor does the same? (Eclipse) IDE still exists because it has clear added-value compared to text editors, this is what you call "the best". If we allow ourselves to only do the trivial parts and give up on creating this added-value, then we simply give up on delivering the essence of an IDE and we drive Eclipse IDE to the limbos of the software developer tools. So IMO, let's just always demand and do the best affordable in the time we have, and keep us asking and answering the question "what should an IDE provide to users to be more useful than a text editor". |