> more than one text-editor (you've listed two) does > syntax-highlighting for autoconf scripts, is scriptable, and > can run subprocesses (emacs and vim aren't IDEs, however - > though there are _probably_ scripts for each which do specific > subtasks). yes, one question is what exactly is an IDE. For me it is something that integrates things I need to develop, such as editing text (still 90% of the Developers work, IMHO, when including mail, specs...), building software (make), get to the location of a compiler warning or error, support navigating to software by something like "tags", language specific syntax highlighting, completion (keyword, file, include file, text word based), folding, running the unit test and display the overall status - the list could be extended of course and depends on favors... I think most that say Emacs/vim are no IDEs simply have the only requirement to integrate a source level debugger. For me, this is wrong, because source level debugging for me is just a last resort option (when the developer failed, the programmer uses a debugger). In other words, debugging is not an integrated part of a developing process (but unit tests are). When I worked with Eclipse, it lacked a lot of features. IIRC not even automake syntax highlightening worked etc pp. >From my point of view, vim and emacs are IDEs, when someone whats to use this term. There are VCS/DVCS extentions to many editors/IDEs, some count them as important for an IDE. I do not do so, because for me mail, phone, whiteboards and change tracking features would be more important in an IDE, but I think there are no such tools yet - and for me such an integration would be too much. A progammable IDE optionally supporting everything could be called an Operating System. oki, Steffen _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
