What if I want a simpler IDE for Julia?

[kevbonham]

@Usor

So you say basically, “Yes, but…”

Well, then what does that matter, that that standard IDE shipped with Julia has power (if true)

The point was discussed at great length in this thread among others. To summarize - the point is not that shipping an IDE with julia prevents others from developing alternatives, it’s that

1. it would take substantial development energy to produce, development energy that many feel is better directed at core language features
2. Once shipped, it would require continued developer time and attention
3. There are already lots of other super usable alternatives, including the default julia REPL
4. Since many people are apt to use / work on the default, any built-in editor could take outside developer attention away from other efforts

@Usor

I still don’t see the problem, because there is none. (Edit… And it would be a simple basic effective IDE; once it’s in place and stable, it doesn’t require much anymore.)

Well, there’s at least one problem. It doesn’t exist, and no one is working towards this goal as far as I know. “Simple basic effective IDE” is, I think, not quite as simple as you seem to believe. Then again, you’re free to open an issue or better yet, a pull request with such a feature.

@Usor

And saying that you’d rather like the Julia folks (you probably mean the main developers) focus on the language isn’t very convincing.

I’m not actually trying to convince you of anything there. I’m stating my preference.

@Usor

Please, like I said to someone else in this thread, if you are going to argue, then at least make it a good argument. One that cannot be pierced.

You seem to think this is more antagonistic than it’s intended. I’m not arguing with you - I’m stating a different opinion, and telling you why I hold that opinion. My “cannot be pierced” argument is that the folks in a position to contribute to such a project have better things to do with their time.