On 29 Dec 2013, at 22:47, [email protected] wrote: > I don't have a good use case for > editing without a project file; anyone else?
It may not be immediately obvious to a mode user what "project file” means: .gpr, .apr, .prj, Makefile? As a list of use cases, - if using another compiler besides GNAT, - if running emacsclient as the editor of choice, - if editing a multiple-unit source text in one file; e.g. test cases, trying Ada features in a "temporary" unit, then I think that doing nothing mode specific (like handling project setup) should still allow editing Ada source text without restrictions (see below for a potential solution). For example, using the more traditional tool of file variables could be expected to be sufficient, certainly less overwhelming than anything that appears bureaucratic, and outside "normal" Emacs conventions. If project setup is later seen to be necessary and even benefitial, this later insight doesn't change the first impressions. (When I hit the case exception file issue earlier, I was dragged into this seemingly unrelated issue, too. It looked like something was intertwined. Maybe the mode versions?) > Some newbies might find it > overwhelming, so we'd have to make that mode optional. Would it not be easier to have Emacs just ask whether it should create a suitable project file if the algorithm does not find one to select? If Ada mode works better when it knows a project, then, since IDEs can usually create project files, let powerful Emacs help itself! 8-) _______________________________________________ Emacs-ada-mode mailing list [email protected] http://host114.hostmonster.com/mailman/listinfo/emacs-ada-mode_stephe-leake.org
