This should please the IDE haters

Processing moving to using Eclipse!

http://benfry.com/writing/archives/738

Andrew

So… arduino moving to eclipse?

Somehow I doubt it :wink:

Its been already done…
http://www.codeproject.com/KB/system/Arduino_Unleashed.aspx

But as a lot of spit glue…

While it does give the IDE crowd some joy… at first glance it does seem to remove some of the “ease of use” that is essentially the Arduino “way” in favor of making hard core “coders” happy.

The additional dependencies say to me that it should possibly remain… optional.

Its been already done…
http://www.codeproject.com/KB/system/Arduino_Unleashed.aspx

But as a lot of spit glue…

Yeah but that’s not official and we all know too well what the difference is :wink:

While it does give the IDE crowd some joy… at first glance it does seem to remove some of the “ease of use” that is essentially the Arduino “way” in favor of making hard core “coders” happy.

To do that you’d move it to emacs :wink:

One could look at it this way, as well: If Processing moves to something like Eclipse or based off it, the Arduino team could simply fork the current IDE and run with it in their own way…

I don’t know if that would be the right choice, but it is an option…

the ide is not based off of processing, its java, just like in processing, porting the functionality seems pretty trivial

also I wouldn’t hate it as much if it was not so damn quirky, same with processing’s ide (which is shared) and bloated

the ide is not based off of processing, its java, just like in processing, porting the functionality seems pretty trivial

also I wouldn’t hate it as much if it was not so darn quirky, same with processing’s ide (which is shared) and bloated

The arduino IDE was based off processing and often gains many of the features from processing because of this.

Mowcius

no look at them, the only thing arduino shares with processing is the IDE which is streight laced java for both IDE’s

and please do tell what features are brought over from processing?

honestly you can replicate the function of the ide with a couple batch files and notepad …

Yeah but that’s not official and we all know too well what the difference is Wink

Yes I know, and that is pretty much shown all over the link that I posted, its really strange to put it working, thats why I love my AvrStudio and do all the code and no libs :wink:

no look at them, the only thing arduino shares with processing is the IDE which is streight laced java for both IDE’s

Have you read what it says ever time it starts up??

Based on processing by Casey Reas and Ben Fry

So it’s not based on processing? ;D

I can change the splash screen to say based on cheese if I want, and no, jeez man have you even used processing? its a totally different language (based on java), they share the same ide, but that ide is written in pretty much vanilla java not processing

cheese n crackers! if it was based on processing wouldnt the IDE be a pde file that anyone could mod at a whim, but NO its compiled java

I will concede that yes the IDE is based on 1 PART of processing, but it has nothing to DO with processing, its like arguing that taco’s and cheeseburgers are identical cause they are both cooked ground beef

:wink:

(and no I dont count the void setup and void loop callbacks, cause that is a common occurrence in many noobier friendly languages, and not a trait of JUST processing)

I guess the real question is will this slow or stop development and bug fixes in the Arduino IDE?

I follow the Arduino Developers Archives a little and notice when the Processing group releases a new version of their IDE they frequently use it in the next Arduino IDE release. So I suspect that the Arduino group presently relies on the Processing group for enhancements and bug fixes that are then brought over to the Arduino release?

Lefty

To do that you’d move it to emacs

Sooooooo true.

@ OSGELD… to my silly eyes… I see WAY more commonality between Processing and Arduino than differences… so, while I understand that you do not… it leaves me confused that you feel that way.

Arduino’s language heritage stands out clear to me.

And here’s the crazy thought. Eclipse still won’t make a majority of people happy… since editing environments are like candy… it seems everyone has a different favorite.

With small projects… the IDE doesn’t bother me… maybe I’m unique in that.

When I’m working on a complex PDE file (or files), I just pull it all into my favorite customizable syntax highlighter editor app, I work on there… and then pass it back to the Arduino IDE and let it do the rest.

I can’t say that ECLIPSE will be a welcome change for me. I’ve used it… and when decisions were being made for a JAVA editor… I selected NETBEANS instead of Eclipse… so maybe I’m just a little nutty.

@ OSGELD… to my silly eyes… I see WAY more commonality between Processing and Arduino than differences… so, while I understand that you do not… it leaves me confused that you feel that way.

because other than the ide and the 2 callbacks there is zero connection between the 2, heck remove the IDE and it can be brotherhood to LOVE2d or any other simplified scripting system

I have been spending A LOT of time in processing trying to get it nailed down, the only connection I feel tween the 2 is the somewhat irksome IDE. I do not think of processing for physical computing, like I dont think of arduino for crossplatform and web multimedia development

yes you can combine the 2, but you can combine arduino with anything, I can go into the windows command interpreter right now, and with a batch file watch the serial port and have windows do actions based on data from the arduino, I wouldnt say “based on windows” though :wink:

if you look at the arduino IDE source there is even very little to do with processing there, yes it ties into the IDE a little, it has to to make it work together, but again this is all done in vanilla java, the meat and potatoes of what happens could in theory be made in a (large and pita) batch file, as its just compiling the “core” frosting layers of code along with avrgcc

it uses the work of the processing developers for the user interface, its not processing, it doesn’t tie in at all (crap if it did I would be having a lot easier of a time with my current led matrix, cause instead of writing my own routines I could just use void draw() )

All this “physical computing” really grind my gears!(Peter Griffin ™)…
Its all about a bunch of people blinking some leds and moving one servo or two and all of a suddent everyone is a very smart and creative artist that understands a hell load of electronics, and can even get expositions all over the world just to see their physical computed “art” fail in the first 12h, then there is processing, how can anyone bloat java anymore than it already is?
Cam’on, I always thougt that it was impossible, but noooooo…
How can a suposselly MIT guys mess up with a plain vanilla lib to use SPI, or a bootloader that can do a butlload of things, less really working to program a chip, its as easy as copying and pasting code from app-notes or even the atmega datasheet, that and all the buffers for everything, serial? Throw 128 at it, I2C? Oh yeah 32bytes, SPI? Who knows how much it will need…
I’m not a professional programmer but even I could things a little bit better, this is a little micro-controller not a desktop pc with Gb of Ram to spend in everything, even the code could be optimized a lot, but no, more than 2K to blink a led :o
Who cares, my arduino is a physical computer, all the people in the world using Z80’s, PIC’s, plain AVR’s, 8051, and all the others MCU’s are just strangers to the thing, because today YOU can have a master degree about how to blink a led.
And really selling books about arduino, wasn’t it open source, free and all those blinky words?

So I guess what I’m hearing is that there is a core group that cannot “grok” the need for the legacy connection to Processing and it’s limp interface standards and would prefer it if we had something like AVRSTUDIO with Arduino compatibility?

(note: My attitude about processing is that both Arduino and Processing are essentially simplified Java… that’s why I see so much similarty.)

Hm, moving away from this piece of software is a good turn… because now finally the arduino team can make IDE features that break the syncronity with Processing to finish 1.0…

Yet still i am no fan of either the IDE nor Eclipse - my favorite is AVRProjectIDE… It should be as simple as that: The Arduino releases should be downloadable in flavors: One with IDE and one bare to be included in the environment one uses the most… (would also save us the trouble to redownload Java the 10th millionth time)

So I guess what I’m hearing is that there is a core group that cannot “grok” the need for the legacy connection to Processing and it’s limp interface standards and would prefer it if we had something like AVRSTUDIO with Arduino compatibility?

what your hearing form me is there is zero reason to tolerate the wonky ide other than thats what they want to use, there is no technical reason that it could not be done any number of ways becuase it has no ties with processing

(note: My attitude about processing is that both Arduino and Processing are essentially simplified Java… that’s why I see so much similarty.)

yea but arduino is NOT JAVA! its c / c++, its compiled against a gcc compiler, you can write plain up avrgcc code and it doesn’t care, you cant write however

List<String> ls = new ArrayList<String>(); // 1