Hank, I think you are confused about how editors can handle multiple languages.
In emacs, when you open a java file, a java mode is loaded, which sets up the
environment for editing java code. When you code in actionscript, it uses an
actionscript mode. In each of these modes, everything about the editor is setup
just like it was an editor just for that language alone, including everything
from syntax highlighting to commands to compile your code.
The reason that supporting multiple languages is a good thing, is that the vast
majority of the functionality of a text editor is the same, regardless of the
language (e.g. search and replace, navigation), so Emacs has been able to
benefit from features that Java users wanted and were applicable to other
languages. Likewise, the interface can also be language independant. Commands
to move across blocks of code work in Python the same as C++, even though
Python uses indentation for blocks and C++ uses braces.
I'm not trying to start an editor war. I couldn't care less what anyone else
uses. I just want to make sure there isn't any FUD going on.
To get back to the original poster's question, I don't think there is any
reason to believe that separate "language specific" editors are inherently
better than a single editor. Look at it this way, it would be entirely possible
to combine all of those editors into one application which would switch the
editor "under the covers" whenever you switch to a document in another
language. That is analogous to what Emacs does.
To address the issue of why the Pragmatic Programmers might suggest Emacs, the
basic message of that entire book is that you should automate everything that
you can. In Emacs that is very easy, because the editor can be customized
quickly and easily. To illustrate, I found myself writing the same boilerplate
code every time I created a new actionscript file, so I wrote a very small
function to insert that code every time I create and new file ending in .as.
For debugging, I found myself tracing out function signatures quite often, e.g.
trace(this + ".someFunction(" + arg1 + "," + arg2 + ")");
That is a pain in the ass, so I made a function, bound to F5, that
automatically inserts that trace statement for whichever function the cursor is
currently within. Each of those functions probably took me 10-15 minutes to add
and immediately incorporate into my work.
I totally agree with Hank, though, that it's not for everyone, but, if you are
interested enough to read books on how to become a better programmer, you might
find that it's worth it. I think the same goes for using a shell and Linux, for
that matter.
-austin
On Wed Jan 03 09:19 , hank williams wrote:
> On 1/3/07, jtgxbass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >Hank,
> >
> >My summarized response is, that for most people, this does not make sense
> >> primarily because so much work has gone into specialized editors that
> >really
> >> fit a *given language* like a glove. Moreover, Most people have decided
> >that
> >> they like GUI and don't like command line only.
> >
> >
> >The problem with your "responses" is that you make soo many assumptions.
> >You say things like "most people". How can you be soo sure?
> >
>
> Ok, well if you dont agree that most people are using gui editors, thats
> fine. It seems obvious to me from all the work I do and all the lists I am
> on, but If you dont agree then so be it. I wont try to convince you.
>
>
> With all the people worldwide I program with on various closed and open
> >source projects, "most" use cmd line based tools. But I am not saying that
> >is a true reflection, how could I possibly know.
> >
> >Back to the topic...
> >What makes you think editors like vim, emacs are not as good as
> >specialized editors? Forget GUI vs cmd line, personally I find these
> >specialized editors a pain to use mainly because I have to remember the key
> >bindings specific to each one when I launch and use it. I code in AS, C/C++
> >and Java mainly. If I use separate editors for each of these (and on the
> >different platforms I work on too - Linux, Mac, PC, I /could/ end up having
> >to learn and switch between 6 different editors. Any perceived benefits of
> >any of these "specialized" editors soon disappears IMHO.
> >
>
> I understand that this is your preference. Nothing wrong with that. But I
> just dont believe more people use emacs or vim than eclipse for editing
> java. This is based on mailing lists, quantity of books on the subject, etc.
> But if you want to argue that more people or an equivalent number of people
> use emacs & vim for java, then it will just have to be your opinion vs mine.
>
> For me, I have found an editor (vim) that does gives me all the features I
> >expect from a code editor and these features work with all the languages I
> >code in. I can code on any platform and not have to learn/switch between
> >various key-bindings. I have code completion, syntax highlighting, code
> >folding, code templates among other great things. I dont want integrated
> >help, wizards or the like.
> >
>
> I suspect you are a far better programmer than me. I need lots of help and
> wizards and the like.
>
>
> And I'm sorry but your assertion that a "specialized" editor could fit a
> >language like a glove, perhaps you could explain to me how any one language
> >is soo different to another. Of course there are arcane examples, but most
> >languages are very similar (Java-AS3 for example).
> >
>
> An AS3 editor cannot find my java errors and make java code suggestions, and
> complete my java functions. The converse would of course also be true. My
> AS3 editor also cannot refactor my java code. But I understand that you dont
> need these things. I, of course do. And as I have said several times in this
> thread with no sarcasm meant at all, I am sure you are a far better
> programmer than I am with a far better memory, and that is why you dont need
> any help. My belief is that most people need such help, which is why eclipse
> and visual studio are so popular. I know your argument is that they are not
> so popular compared to emacs and vim, and on that point we will obviously
> have to disagree.
>
> Regards,
> Hank
> _______________________________________________
> osflash mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
--
Austin Haas
Pet Tomato, Inc.
http://pettomato.com
_______________________________________________
osflash mailing list
[email protected]
http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
