Norman Palardy wrote: > On Apr 03, 2007, at 9:59 AM, Theodore H. Smith wrote: >> Editing code is NOT a special need these days Norman. HTML is code. >> XML is code. Plain text is code... we need code editors for our daily >> lives these days... >> >> This isn't the 1980s anymore... >> >> RB's editfield handle huge amounts of text, and it's awkward to >> style. And styling huge amounts of text is impossible. >> >> I'm not impressed to be honest, that RB create a solution, that most >> of us need for non-competitive purposes (we aren't going to make >> another RB with the code editor editfield)... and then don't give it >> to us. > > Theo > > Those are all text. > And yes any text editor can do those things, including RB's editfield. > > The "special" items that are in the code editor in the RB IDE re the > code folding, syntax highlighting and all any of the other items that > are of use ONLY within the context of the RB IDE. > In that way it has "special" requirements and so it's not just an > editfield.
There is one area where Theo's assertion does hold some ground. Anybody who deals with supporting RBScript in their application will understand the need for an editor that specifically supports editing of RB code. It would be so much nicer to have end customers enjoy the benefits that we as developers have when they write scripts. The RB IDE script editor demonstrates that they have the ability to do this, but have chosen to not to do so. An EditField specifically designed to handle RBScripts would really be a great thing to have. _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode: <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/> Search the archives: <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
