On 29 May 2001, at 9:38, Shlomi Fish wrote:
> On Mon, 28 May 2001, Guillermo S. Romero / Familia Romero wrote:
> 
> > In general, I think the replies 501 and 503 you got are more or less
> > on target, based in all the talk I have seen about it. It is the way
> > it has been done mostly, and everybody serious about coding has a
> > nice editor that helps and parses whatever languaje you use (view
> > code in a web browser? eeek! I hope it has been parsed with one of
> > those apps that add colours to source in HTML, at least).
> 
> Sometimes one has to work on terminals, for which the terminal program
> or the editor does not support colours. I know joe does not, and this
> is the editor I use on _terminals_ (on X I use gvim). What I mean is
> that it is important for the code to be as readable as possible with
> or without syntax-highlighting bracket matching or whatever.

Just to avoid confusion: viewing code (I take it you mean HTML code, 
Guillermo) is like viewing binary code. HTML is not a programming 
language, but a document mark-up language. Since in most Western (and 
AFAIK other) languages white space matters, so it does in HTML. You 
will never get completely clean looking HTML. (It would have been 
possible by marking-up white space from the beginning, but my guess 
is that would have led to even bigger problems.) Oh, and BTW, HTML 
was never meant to be edited in a plain text editor either, it is 
just that purpose-built web editors have never been able to keep up 
with developments on the web.

I apologise for any coding style mistakes I may have made in the u-
diff I sent recently. Should I reexamine the code and send a new u-
diff to this list?

-- 
branko collin
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Gimp-developer mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

Reply via email to