> On Apr 03, 2007, at 1:54 PM, Theodore H. Smith wrote: > >>> Or support Brandon and his efforts with the FTC. >> I'm not aware of what Brandon is up to. > > Check it out but it's not a "code" editor either
All I'm asking for is easy and fast on demand syntax styling (on demand means you only style what's on screen)... and... the ability to edit long files, fast. That's all a code editor needs. The rest of language specific stuff should be implemented by the developer using the library. You keep getting this wrong. I'm not asking for RB to do work for me... I'm asking RB to not make it IMPOSSIBLE or needlessly hard, for me to what I want to do. It's such a simple argument yet you keep assuming I'm asking for RS to provide me an RB code editor or all sorts of code editing features. When all I want is speed and easy styling. > Because it's not easy to do well cross platform ? It's not that hard... it just takes time. Not all that much time, for a commercial company. > If it were so easy don't you think they would have done it already ? So first it's easy, then it's hard? Well I think it's not that hard... if I were paid to do it I would have. Well I got a job of my own now... > if youv'e got issues with what it can and cannot do you probably need > to bitch at Apple as well. Not really... RB is using a customised version of some open source library. I forgot which but it was quite popular at one point. Only they didn't really improve the editfield... only make it simpler, and harder to program styling and slower. ATSUI is plenty fast... it doesn't give you a text editor you see, it just gives you lower level stuff. So telling me to "bitch at Apple", that's nonsense. Apple have done their job. Their API is fine, it just needs wrapping into something simpler, without losing the power. > There is a new version and the WordGuise plugin wraps it up for use. Too bad RB can't use WASTE properly then, without crippling it to make it slow. > Make a plugin. RB should have such fundamentals built in. Same applies for you saying I should do it. Why? RB should have it built in... > The editfield in RB is what it is and if you don't like it write one > that you DO like. > > That's what software engineers do. Sure. Software engineers also write everything in C++ and write their own frameworks from scratch. Your argument makes no sense in a RAD environment. Why even use RB if you think that way? The basics should be provided. Sure I can do that. I can do a lot of things. But I only have time for some of them. RB's editfield is NOT up to standard. It's the biggest let down in RB. RB's folderitems may not be perfect, but I've never found they restricted me. Same with buttons, or listboxes... But the editfield is different. RB is lacking there. Please don't respond missing (again) my entire point that I made right from the start although you chose to miss it the first time. Which is that I'm not asking for a code editor. Just something that quickly handles huge amounts of text and allows for on-demand (event based) styling of only the text on screen. The rest I have time to do do. _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode: <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/> Search the archives: <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
