[Ocaml-biz] IDEs

[Brandon J. Van Every]

Brian Hurt wrote:
>
> I want to ask what changes you think need to be made- to gnu emacs,
> Xemacs, or vim?

Vim doesn't have the critical mass of users that Emacs does, either in
OCaml-land or any other land.  As a Windows guy looking at different
available editors, I see no technical advantage Vim has whatsoever over
Emacs.  Vim is just as difficult to learn as Emacs.  Thus, in my book,
Vim loses on popularity.  All other factors being equal, if one product
has huge deployment, support community, and lotsa developers, and the
other doesn't, you go with the popular horse.

I'm happy to hear from a Vim guy why my statement is wrong.  But, let's
hear it before choosing to champion Vim.  Again, this isn't about
whether some specific individual should choose or avoid Vim.
Individuals should do what they like.  This is about whether Vim is a
best-of-breed tool for commercial, mission critical software.  We should
only be pushing the best, because our job of showcasing OCaml is very,
very hard.

Regarding GNU Emacs vs. XEmacs, elisp compatibility clearly and
overwhelmingly favors GNU Emacs.  This has nothing to do with OCaml, it
is the dominant trend for everything.  If you want to just *use* Emacs,
and want to be sure that an *.el file you grab from somewhere is
actually going to work without you having to futz with it, you want to
be on GNU Emacs.  On XEmacs it might work, it might not.  Nothing is
going to change about this.  It is the strategic reality of who controls
the world of Emacs.

XEmacs might be better if you wanted to *develop* elisp code for an
editor, as it may possibly have a cleaner internal architecture, and
definitely has more GUI bells and whistles to offer.  Such is my reading
of their various project archives.  That said, archives can be the
situation yesterday, not today.  It would be amusing if the historical
positions of "which is easier to develop for" have actually reversed.
One can't really know without becoming an Emacs developer.  That won't
be me, and it isn't relevant anyways.  Most people simply want to *use*
Emacs, not develop for it.

In my view, the strategic landscape of these editors is clear.  The
critical mass and support are what they are.  I'd welcome any evidence
to the contrary.


Cheers,                     www.indiegamedesign.com
Brandon Van Every           Seattle, WA

"The pioneer is the one with the arrows in his back."
                          - anonymous entrepreneur