Re: Problems with QtOctave

[Laurent Hoeltgen]

Hi

> 
> I think we have to think about the overall strategy here.  We want
> people to use Octave in the most efficient way.  I think it's clear that
> we don't want to write yet another text editor.  Basically, writing an
> IDE for every single language is a rather bad idea, a construct from
> history.  And it would require resources we don't have (it seems).
> 
> People are asking for something to replace the proprietary user
> interface, and maybe we can give them what they want without cloning
> that said interface.  Because we had a couple of tries at cloning now,
> as you mentioned, and they were very hard to pull off.  Maybe we can
> give users what they want, but not what they are asking for?
> 
> So one way to reach out would be to write an Eclipse plugin.  That way
> we could reach people that want some IDE.  Or Anjuta.  Or KDevelop.
> 
> But I think we got to have a terminal emulator and true readline
> functionality.  We simply can't have a command line interface without
> it.  That's doable on true posix systems, but on Windows it's probably a
> lot of work.  octavede runs under cygwin, not "true" win32.  Actually,
> just having a glorified/themed terminal emulator on win32, even without
> a visual editor/debugger, would probably do much to help.  Maybe we
> should ship rxvt in the next Octave For Windows package?
> 
> Grundberg

Somebody on this Mailing list mentioned Cantor
(http://edu.kde.org/cantor/) some time ago. I think it's an interesting
approach to have a single frontend for different backends. Maybe it's
worth to consider that one as well.

Greetings,
Laurent.