From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Richard Elberger" To: <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: RE: [9fans] source code as data not text Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In-Reply-To: <20010618152511.B7DBA19A08@mail.cse.psu.edu> Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 15:52:41 +1200 Topicbox-Message-UUID: bd0b7eaa-eac9-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 >and while i'm not entirely clear on what exactly lac was refering=20 >to, can you >deny the usefulness of being able to "grep ^foo(" in code, or=20 >suggest that a >databasse system would make that easier somehow? again, as noted = earlier, >db-based source code systems are another failure to use the = little-tools >model appropriatly. select .. from .. where .. What's the difference? The only difference I see is every time you grep = you do an fopen/fclose. With databases, information can even be cached, = and can perhaps be "smarter" through cross-referencing. While this is a = generalization on a massive scale, I think it is comparable. > >and as dan points out, SCCS/CVS style stuff is not what's at issue = here. > But it is -- editing, checking in/out, collaborating, etc. To just have = another editor is short-sighted. Imo, Rational Software almost has it = 100% right -- they have process, tools, and repositories integrated with = 3rd party products. They just don't have the full-blown = integration/collaboration that's needed. =20 >//In fact, you'd be surprised how many big software companies are = already >//moving that way... > >much to my dismay, i believe you. but then, i'm often suprised how many = big >companies are doing _lots_ of things i consider stupid. PeopleSoft, = anyone? But people still buy their software ... why? Perhaps to the customers = it adds value. In any case, internal process is different than how = products realize the customer's need. Maybe your comment is about = internal-Peoplesoft, which I know nothing about... > >the most involved syntax highlighting i find useful is=20 >paren/bracket/quote/&c >matching. i could imagine an editor that did that well (acounting for = the >language-specific escapes and such) being quite nice. more than=20 >that i've not >found useful, and it's distracting and damaging to people who're = learning. >and what acme's got now is good 95 times out of 100. >-=CE=B1. > > In your particular case... acme still tires me out. When using Inferno, = I use that plain-text editor instead of acme -- with the syntax = highlighting for limbo. I think it's nice to have the option. I just = wish there was a nicely integrated source management system so I = wouldn't have to worry. -- rich