On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 9:13 AM, Tudor Girba <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi, > > I think that having Pillar in comments is definitely the way to go. > > In: > > http://www.humane-assessment.com/blog/writing-pillar-books-with-the-gtinspector > > I show also an extension that renders comments with PIllar highlighting. > This is working now in an inspector, but the same principle can be applied > to other browsers. > Yes, that's what I tried in the past. The ability to associate graphics explaining structures is really useful there. Phil > > Cheers, > Doru > > > > On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 8:47 AM, Christophe Demarey < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> >> Le 22 sept. 2015 à 07:49, [email protected] a écrit : >> >> >> Le 22 sept. 2015 07:40, "Sven Van Caekenberghe" <[email protected]> a écrit : >> > >> > >> > > On 21 Sep 2015, at 23:53, stepharo <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > >> > > I think that having metadata (style) language and data (source code) >> mixed together is a bad idea. >> > > I never like the ]lang[ tag because it is a huge hack. It does not >> even exist in the Smalltalk syntax!!! >> > > We save code that the parser cannot parse. What we fun idea. >> > > So people are bashing for backward compatibility and we remove a bad >> way to encode >> > > metadata then suddenly it looks like we were doing something bad. >> > > >> > > Stef >> > >> > I am with Stef, it is a silly idea to mix the two. Nobody uses this in >> Pharo. Cleaning up means simplifying too. >> >> In the code no. But in the comments, that would be good to have back. In >> color form. As we can write pillar class comments, can't we render them ? >> Moose as an editor/viewer for pillar files >> >> >> Yes, it is where we want to go: use Pillar for styled comments. >> Once we have that, we can remove Text styling from source code / comments. >> >> > > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > > "Every thing has its own flow" >
