4 ms·
Hmm, maybe I misunderstood the author’s point slightly, but I find what you suggest the argument was even less convincing. Here’s the history: Every editor has
by codeflo 4y ago
Hmm, maybe I misunderstood the author’s point slightly, but I find what you suggest the argument was even less convincing.
Here’s the history: Every editor has a language abstraction already. And some language analyzers had an “editor abstraction”, perhaps notably Roslyn for C# with its programmable refactoring rules that worked in multiple editors.
None of that was new. But that’s still N*M if you do the math, so that graph was never completely filled — for the obvious reason that this would have been practically impossible. No mystery about it.
- mgdlbp 4y agoAnd considering how VB.NET was incorporated first-class besides C#, Roslyn seems rather ahead of its time, with both language abstraction at the compiler level and language-agnostic analysers based on semantic info. I still can't get over the awesomeness of being able to just throw together a fully supported custom analyser from a template—unique to Roslyn to this day, AFAIK.