Hello, the Bat! list recipients,
Tuesday, January 11, 2000, Steve Lamb wrote to Oleg Zalyalov about
suggestion- / wish-list:
>> Why do carpenters need other tools than bench axe? Underlying concept
>> to most of those is the same: wood.
SL> A bench axe cannot change configuration to suit the task at hand. A
SL> program can be configured for the task at hand. Apples and oranges, try
SL> again.
It can do any task at hand depending on user skills even with no need
to change configuration. Just visit Kizhi for an example.
>> When programming I use language-specific templates I don't need to know of
>> when I am editing news or mail or writing poerty.
SL> Those templates can be added in.
>> I also need project management and so on.
SL> The project management environment can call the editor in
SL> question.
>> When I write a book I will need heavy word processing including
>> cross-references and so on.
SL> Which is possible. I've seen books written in just VI. OTOH,
SL> you'll note
I didn't say it's all impossible. I just meant that at every task I do
implement I will need only 1/Nth part of the SuperEditor (vim?). I
don't think that it is better to spawn another process which first
will decide which task it spawned for to configure itself in proper
way and to load only what I need now then just to have a standartized
interface within built-in editor. Which is almost already done -- most
of editor specific shortcuts are calling editor specific functions for
most editors, while most of common functions has common shortcuts.
SL> I didn't put word processing into my list because I do know that is a
SL> different task than just editing ASCII text.
Why are you so inconsistant? It's underlying data also ASCII text and
it has the very same basic functions. Where is your difference between
'just' and 'not just'?
>> I don't need bloated do-everything editor where I will have to use
>> Ctrl-Alt-Shift combinations alot because simple keys are occupied by
>> functions which I will never need for my current task.
SL> Funny, vim uses no CNTL-ALT-SHIFT combonations. I also don't consider it
SL> bloated compared to reimplementing the same basic editor 20 times.
Don't vim use standard windows edittext object? I'm sure TB! does.
SL>>> Quick templates are nothing more than imported text with replacement of
SL>>> macros. That can be achieved several different ways.
>> How?
SL> What do you mean "how?" Give me an example. One of mine is I have a
SL> template which puts in the date/time. I can write a perl script to replace a
SL> macro to do that. Big whoop.
I mean QuickTemplates e.g. containing %OATTACHEMENTS macro. How?
>> Never, because it is not underlying data defines the way people handle it
>> but the purpose of editing. Just discussed this regarding mail and news
>> management here.
SL> Right, that is why the editor changes modes to suit the needs of the task
SL> at hand. Why should I have to learn 20 different keystrokes just do delete a
SL> line? Is that not common to all of those tasks?
I don't know 20 different keystrokes just to del line. I use Shift-Dn,
Del. Works on all comprehensive editors I know (I don't use UNIX).
--
Best regards,
Oleg Zalyalov. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Using The Bat! version 1.38e
under Windows NT 4.0 Build 1381 Service Pack 6
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--------------------------------------------------------------
