On Tuesday 26 June 2001 04:18 am, Bernd Gehrmann wrote:
> > Of course having "intended to have done it longer" doesn't mean a lot. It
> > looks like some very nice stuff going into Gideon. The difference being
> > though that while Kdevelop will do those things nicely and diversely
> > Quanta will be tightly focused exclusivly around developing mark up
> > language documents primarily focused on web use (with a strong PHP
> > focus). Our intent is to merge the document and programming models. As I
> > perceive it one might lean to using Kdevelop for PHP if the program and
> > need to do some web work but if they are primarily web oriented or do
> > production web development they would gravitate to Quanta.
>
> Well, I did not say that you should give up Quanta or merge it with
> KDevelop :-) 
Actually we were thinking more of elves coding while we slept. ;-)
> It's probably a good idea to do things differently which
> appear differently to the user. As the target group of web development
> tools is quite manifold, from programmers to designers, there is
> certainly enough place for different approaches.
In my opinion this is nothing but a good thing. Also while Quanta has more of 
a document focus it can still have a solid programming implimentation. It 
seems to me that given the choice people will work where they are most 
comfortable. With that in mind I think more people are likely to be more 
comfortable around HTML/PHP than C++ so it would be good to have Quanta up to 
speed.
>
> OTOH, I'm sure that there is a significant overlap in which resources
> are better spent on finding common solutions than on reimplementing
> things in various projects. The text editor is such an example. In
> the long run, it would be good to use it as a part, and avoid forking
> variants of kwrite and having to maintain them forever. With Matthias'
> work on the editor stuff, we're nearer to this goal with KDevelop,
> although not quite finished. Code completion is one example where the
> editor interface has to extended. I'm not very familiar with the PHP
> stuff in KDevelop (that's mainly Sandy's and Thomas Fromm's work),
> but I'm sure some of this can be shared as well (in both directions).
> The scripting part may also be worth looking at :-)
>
> Bernd.
>
I agree, at least in concept. Dima and Alex thought the editor issues would 
not be a practical exchange with Kate. Now looking at it I see some areas 
where the Quanta editor has missed functionality. It seems to me that as long 
as we can address the additional functionality we include in a shared project 
on a kpart that would make a lot more sense.

Since you mentioned things on the do list for PHP matching up was folding 
text in there? I have pulled down and built Gideon recently but have not 
looked at it extensively. As for the rest of the PHP stuff maybe we should 
exchange info. I have been looking at building some Perl scripts to extract 
PHP commands from the docs. From there it becomes an issue of how to format 
and use the information.

Scripting for us has been rather simple. Dima enabled shell access so that 
any language on the system could be used. What I have been doing lately is 
working with Kaptain as a dialog scripting language. It would be good after 
the 2.2 release to see about getting it into KDE. It enables powerful dialog 
creation from simple scripts and would allow for integration with other 
scripting languages. 

Also speaking of parts and such... have you thought of this approach with 
Cervisia, or DCOP enabling? Cervisia is such a great tool. Every time I think 
of cvs enabling Quanta I think of how much I like Cervisia but as yet have no 
clear vision as to the best way to approach integration.

cheers
-- 
Eric Laffoon                    sequitur@kde.org
A member of the Quanta+ Web development team
http://quanta.sourceforge.net
 
>> Visit http://master.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<