Re: My perspective as a mid-level user on pros/cons of different editors

[chad]

In addition to the philosophical reason, there's an effort-based reason, and then there's the fact that it's a nasty combinatorics problem. Pick a version of emacs (26 vs. 27 matters, although the setups probably don't differ too much), then:

 for each language you want to support, (many)

 for each OS/version, (at least 3)

 for each method of installing non-elisp packages, (varies from "a couple" to "half-dozen plus")

you *still* often have choices to make. This is probably also why the typical "external tool install method" is a documentation line that says something like "install ripgrep" or "make sure python-shell-interpreter and py-shell-name are both set to python 3".

On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 2:55 AM ndame <address@hidden> wrote:

> As a user, I really want to be able to jump to

> eclaration/implementation/find references/get completion to work etc. I

> ouldn't care as slightest how it is implemented as long as it worked

> ell. Unfortunately (or fortunately) I know all the minutiae details on

> ow it works in my copy of Emacs since I had to install each and every

> acakge and configure them all together to get that working for me.

> hich indeed took quite some time untill I learned what I need, how to

> onfigure it and finally how to use it.

As you did it already how hard would it be you think to create a package which does this automatically?

I'm wondering why somebody hasn't made this already.

I don't mean a package in ELPA, but rather in MELPA, so the package is not restricted from downloading and installing a server, etc it could do anything what is needed to set up the configuration. Why aren't there packages for various languages which set up the completion/go to definition stuff automatically? Is there a technical problem?