Chris those are really interesting ideas... RE: Adding references... Perhaps an analogue to gemfile? Maybe just parse through the using statements to discover all of the dependencies at runtime and reference them automatically.
RE: Rake... It does look a lot like rake. I wonder if Ruby and Python have a similar pattern in their interpreter/compiler. I wonder if it would continue to look that way if I continued adding features. To answer your question about where I want to go with this... I want to enable simple things to be simple. All too often in .NET simple problems require solutions that are made complicated by the solutions to more complex problems (Single page Asp.NET site vs. Asp anyone?). It's getting better and I'm looking for ways to improve it even further. The other night I was working on my ruby/Sinatra project on my girlfriends machine via Notepad++ and she commented that it's nice that I could do that. Yeah, it is. As a programmer, when I want to write a c# program on my girlfriend's very low-powered computer, I need to be able to do so with a foot print that's small enough that I can get it set up in 5-10 minutes and be instantly productive. Visual Studio is a non-option. On Nov 17, 3:38 am, Chris Bilson <[email protected]> wrote: > One interesting point I think this brings up is the lack of external (i.e., > _not_ in the IDE) tools for working with source code. Sometimes it would be > nice if you could access some of the power of something like resharper > outside of the IDE, in a script for example. That's part of how people using > vim today to work with ruby code for example aren't in the dark ages you > described: vim can be extended with (in ruby no less), and there are lots of > little tools for working with source code, so the programmer is a little > more in control of their environment (unfortunately, ctags is still part of > that!) > > Meta-programming (programs that write/manipulate programs/source) is one > area where I think _we_ are in the dark ages with visual studio (watch a > clojure developer working in emacs sometime.) At Agile Open NW, Glenn had a > session to solicit feedback about .net tooling and this was one of the big > weaknesses that I think everyone there agreed on: why can't I use powershell > or ironruby inside of visual studio as a macro language for example? Or in > the immediate window. There are many times when this would come in handy. > > A few problems I see with IronLove though: > > 1. We need to add references and other compiler settings. > 2. This looks kind of like rake. Why not use rake? Rake can glob files and > make dependencies out of them (like foo.exe depends on **/*.cs.) If albacore > had a csc task that would help too. > > Is that kind of where you want to go with this? Replace proj files with rake > files that glob? What other ideas do you have for this? > > --c > > > > On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 23:13, Chris Tavares <[email protected]> wrote: > > Sounds like you want to work the way we worked in C on Unix back in the > > day. > > Spend a few weeks with VI, manually navigating your code by file (don't > > forget to run ctags after a change!) and arguing with your manually > > maintained makefiles and you'll really appreciate VS again. :-) > > > -Chris > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] [mailto: > > [email protected]] > > On Behalf Of Justin Bozonier > > Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 7:49 PM > > To: Seattle area Alt.Net > > Subject: Screw You VS Project and Solution Files! > > > What if we could develop .NET programs without any IDE... just Notepad > > and a heart filled with hope? It'd be hawt that's what! > > > I've been ruminating on why I feel so much more productive in Ruby > > land and on how I can bring some of that to the MS development stack. > > One of the big pain points for me is Visual Studio and all of its > > project and solution files. > > > At first I thought it was the fact Ruby doesn't compile.. That's nice > > but not **huge**... Python compiles after all... Then I realized one > > of the big things Visual Studio (along with R#) helps me do is find my > > classes and files. I've seen leaning on Visual Studio cause an > > enormous loss of cohesion across packages which forms a self- > > reinforcing cycle of needing even more Visual Studio packagement. > > > This is an experiment I've been working with over the past couple > > research days that was a thought of what could be done to reduce that > > pain. It's a Ruby script you can run in a folder to compile all c# > > files and execute them as though they were a set of scripts and > > modules. It's VERY simplistic and I only consider it a proof of > > concept but still I'd like to hear some of your thoughts on this. > > Ideally, I'd like to be able to develop an entire C# application only > > using this technique. > > > You can get a rough idea of what's going on inside the tests but I did > > a bad job testing. So ask questions if you got 'em. > > > Anyone else with thoughts on this or other ways of doing truly > > "Alt" .NET development? :) > > > The git:https://github.com/jcbozonier/IronLove > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "Seattle area Alt.Net" group. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > [email protected]<altnetseattle%2bunsubscr...@goog > > legroups.com> > > . > > For more options, visit this group at > >http://groups.google.com/group/altnetseattle?hl=en. > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "Seattle area Alt.Net" group. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > [email protected]<altnetseattle%2bunsubscr...@goog > > legroups.com> > > . > > For more options, visit this group at > >http://groups.google.com/group/altnetseattle?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Seattle area Alt.Net" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/altnetseattle?hl=en.
