> BTW, thanks for the multi-line tags. Once I had that, a task I had to > do (converting several thousand lines of assembly to C) took little > time at all.
What does the convergence of ACME and SAM actually look like? It seems to me that we could design the new generation Plan 9 editor from the building blocks already provided instead of exploring the labyrinth of possible options and unavoidable dead ends. Typically, I think ACME's filesystem is fundamental to a Plan 9 editor whereas window-pane placement ought to be controlled by individual user preferences, particularly the heuristics. To me, the expanded tag is a SAM feature (hopefully) well integrated into ACME: I would prefer if it resembled the SAM version a little more closely. I also find SAM's remote editing ability very convenient, but in ACME it may be better to implement this by separating the filesystem from the editing commands so that remote editing can be done by applying instructions to a remote ACME fileserver. Not that I know what I'm talking about, but it seems an option from a distance. A feature that has been bothering me for a while is more applicable to the shell, but perhaps it's worth presenting here. Given a file server and command interpreter, not unlike ACME's role, one could have a virtual "bin" directory which contains scripts in the interpreted language. The ability to bind additional scripts to this directory would provide something resembling "loadable modules". Those scripts that are compiled into the binary would in effect be "built-in". The idea came to me when trying to understand the various Plan 9 kernels and my immediate thinking was "rc" and "tcl". Has this idea ever struck anyone else? Has anyone implemented anything of this nature? ++L
