<div dir="ltr">Nice article, but I'm not sure it's completely right.<div><br></div><div>Even language's mavens use an IDE, probably a custom one built out of terminal windows, makefiles and so on. And, to my money, this can be effective, but difficult to share and setup.</div>
<div>Emacs, actually is a bit easier to share and setup, in such a context (Emacs IS an IDE), but a bit difficult to learn (and to be honest, to learn again... :-D) </div><div>I guess that XMonad born almost like an alternative to Emacs to integrate different tools in a consistent windowing.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Indeed powerful languages are useful to express powerful concepts (thus they are funny!)</div><div><br></div><div>Tools are useful for boring activities. For example, editing makefiles (and studing autotools) is a boring activity. :-D</div>
<div>Debuggers are useful to find bugs, another boring activity.</div><div><br></div><div>Still both activities are unavoidable (afaik) by professional programmers. You can do both without tools, but they will require more time, thus more annoyance.</div>
<div><br></div><div>This is why, to my money, looking for an IDE (even if it's just a specific configuration of xmonad or Emacs) is a rational search. :-)</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>BTW, now, I'm wondering if I should give Geany a try or just learn Emacs again... :-)</div>
<div>For example, I'm sure that Emacs can do almost everything I need (project management apart), but I'm also sure that I have no chance to convince my fellow windows programmers to use it.</div><div><br></div><div>
<br></div><div>Giacomo</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 8:51 AM, Rustom Mody <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:rustompmody@gmail.com" target="_blank">rustompmody@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div class="im">On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 2:36 AM, Giacomo Tesio <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:giacomo@tesio.it" target="_blank">giacomo@tesio.it</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">A few years ago I was an Emacs user too, so I'm not surprised of these answers. In the last 4 years, my job moved to windows, and I have worked mainly on C# and .NET so that I've become a kind of VisualStudio addict. Still I used Spyder for scientifical computing and jEdit a lot for casual editing on windows.<div>
<br></div><div>There are a few features that I think are important for professional development:</div><div>- debugging support</div><div>- project management (should I really learn cabal packaging?)</div>
<div>- underline sintactic errors</div><div>- code navigation</div><div>- autocompletion (based on scope)</div><div>- testing integration</div><div><br></div><div>Optional valuable features</div>
<div>- syntax highlight</div><div>- section folds</div><div><br></div><div>I'm using Leksah, right now, but I'm still not satisfied. This despite the hard and respectful work of the author.</div>
<div><br></div><div>I'd like to have an excuse to use Emacs (or vim) at work (windows) and at home (Linux), but I'm not sure that it satisfies these basic requirements. Any "ready to use" .emacs for Haskell?</div>
<div><br></div></div></blockquote></div><div><br>This was written 10 years ago.... still remains true...<br><a href="http://osteele.com/posts/2004/11/ides" target="_blank">http://osteele.com/posts/2004/11/ides</a> <br></div>
</div><br>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Beginners mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Beginners@haskell.org">Beginners@haskell.org</a><br>
<a href="http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners" target="_blank">http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>