RFC: 'What would you like in an Text Editor?'

RFC: 'What would you like in an Text Editor?'

[Jeffrey Drake]

If you were going to use an editor for context usage (potentially
integrated into a Context suite), what features would you like from
it?

Especially interested in what features in regular editors are quite
useless to have around all the time. I tried the scite in the context
mswindows distro, and didn't find it the most visually appealing and
slightly cumbersome in configuration.

Regards,
Jeffrey Drake

Re: RFC: 'What would you like in an Text Editor?'

[John R. Culleton]

On Sunday 26 March 2006 19:24, Jeffrey Drake wrote:
> If you were going to use an editor for context usage (potentially
> integrated into a Context suite), what features would you like from
> it?
>
> Especially interested in what features in regular editors are quite
> useless to have around all the time. I tried the scite in the context
> mswindows distro, and didn't find it the most visually appealing and
> slightly cumbersome in configuration.
>
> Regards,
> Jeffrey Drake
> _______________________________________________
> ntg-context mailing list
> ntg-context@ntg.nl
> http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context


Well basically I like the feature set of Gvim. For newbies I
recommend eVim, which is Gvim jammed in first gear.
-- 
John Culleton
Books with answers to marketing and publishing questions:
http://wexfordpress.com/tex/shortlist.pdf

Book coaches, consultants and packagers:
http://wexfordpress.com/tex/packagers.pdf

Re: RFC: 'What would you like in an Text Editor?'

[Jeffrey Drake]

I am talking about specific features for an editor I am thinking of
making. I have tried gvim before and am not very happy while using it.

On 3/26/06, John R. Culleton <john@wexfordpress.com> wrote:
> On Sunday 26 March 2006 19:24, Jeffrey Drake wrote:
> > If you were going to use an editor for context usage (potentially
> > integrated into a Context suite), what features would you like from
> > it?
> >
> > Especially interested in what features in regular editors are quite
> > useless to have around all the time. I tried the scite in the context
> > mswindows distro, and didn't find it the most visually appealing and
> > slightly cumbersome in configuration.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Jeffrey Drake
> > _______________________________________________
> > ntg-context mailing list
> > ntg-context@ntg.nl
> > http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
>
>
> Well basically I like the feature set of Gvim. For newbies I
> recommend eVim, which is Gvim jammed in first gear.
> --
> John Culleton
> Books with answers to marketing and publishing questions:
> http://wexfordpress.com/tex/shortlist.pdf
>
> Book coaches, consultants and packagers:
> http://wexfordpress.com/tex/packagers.pdf
>
> _______________________________________________
> ntg-context mailing list
> ntg-context@ntg.nl
> http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
>

Re: RFC: 'What would you like in an Text Editor?'

[Taco Hoekwater]

Hi Jeffrey,

Jeffrey Drake wrote:
> If you were going to use an editor for context usage (potentially
> integrated into a Context suite), what features would you like from
> it?

* Good spellchecking, including private and special-purpose dicts.
* A re-wrap paragraph implementation that leaves lines that do not
   start with alphanumerics alone
* support for different input encodings, notably utf-8 and iso-latinX
* CRLF/LF/CR conversions
* regular expression search (&replace)
* configurable syntax highlighting
* adjustable font size
* support for large (log) files (>100MB)
* rectangle selection
* difference checking

> Especially interested in what features in regular editors are quite
> useless to have around all the time. I tried the scite in the context
> mswindows distro, and didn't find it the most visually appealing and
> slightly cumbersome in configuration.

I use emacs almost all the time, with SciTE slowly gaining ground.
SciTE is rather ok, but definately too minimalistic for my taste.

These days I can do without gnus (nntp), vm (mail) and auctex, but I
use dired (file management), vc (revision control), gnuserv
(client|server interface), other-window|other-frame  (extra
windows/viewports) and the calendar|diary fulltime.

Cheers, taco

Re: RFC: 'What would you like in an Text Editor?'

[Thomas A. Schmitz]

OK, what the man said, plus:

* not only different encodings, but also easy way of reencoding files;
* fonts and colors are easily customizable (maybe different schemes  
for syntax highlighting);
* line numbers in the margin;
* large chunks of text can be commented out easily;
* I would love the powerful regex search/replace of vim and emacs  
with a somehwat simpler
   (GUI-driven?) interface;
* easy support for different utf planes;
* customizable support for ConTeXt environments, commands, etc.,  
ConTeXt can be called from
   within the editor with a simple shortcut.

What I find useless:

- I want an editor, not a pseudo operating system, so I don't need a  
shell within the editor;
- I don't use spellchecking (too error-prone).

Thomas (who still can't make up his mind whether he likes emacs +  
auctex or gvim better)

On Mar 27, 2006, at 10:24 AM, Taco Hoekwater wrote:

> Hi Jeffrey,
>
> Jeffrey Drake wrote:
>> If you were going to use an editor for context usage (potentially
>> integrated into a Context suite), what features would you like from
>> it?
>
> * Good spellchecking, including private and special-purpose dicts.
> * A re-wrap paragraph implementation that leaves lines that do not
>    start with alphanumerics alone
> * support for different input encodings, notably utf-8 and iso-latinX
> * CRLF/LF/CR conversions
> * regular expression search (&replace)
> * configurable syntax highlighting
> * adjustable font size
> * support for large (log) files (>100MB)
> * rectangle selection
> * difference checking
>
>> Especially interested in what features in regular editors are quite
>> useless to have around all the time. I tried the scite in the context
>> mswindows distro, and didn't find it the most visually appealing and
>> slightly cumbersome in configuration.
>
> I use emacs almost all the time, with SciTE slowly gaining ground.
> SciTE is rather ok, but definately too minimalistic for my taste.
>
> These days I can do without gnus (nntp), vm (mail) and auctex, but I
> use dired (file management), vc (revision control), gnuserv
> (client|server interface), other-window|other-frame  (extra
> windows/viewports) and the calendar|diary fulltime.
>
> Cheers, taco
> _______________________________________________
> ntg-context mailing list
> ntg-context@ntg.nl
> http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context

Re: RFC: 'What would you like in an Text Editor?'

[Jeffrey Drake]

Thank you for both your replies. The thing I am looking at right now
is using scintilla for the basis of a windows editor (windows api) and
scripted with TCL.

The interface I am envisioning is one of an old dos editor I used to
use (called Programmer's Editor). It attached all functions to the
function keys including menu navigation. But otherwise bindings to
keys could easily be made. My thoughts are to implement most
functionality in TCL, including configuration.

I don't know if this is the best interface, but only one of
possibilities. Calling ConTeXt is the first thing on my mind. One
problem I want to solve well is whether or not to allow tk to be used
for additional gui functionality when functions need it.

Having a regular menu is not beyond thought either though.

- Jeffrey

On 3/27/06, Thomas A. Schmitz <thomas.schmitz@uni-bonn.de> wrote:
> OK, what the man said, plus:
>
> * not only different encodings, but also easy way of reencoding files;
> * fonts and colors are easily customizable (maybe different schemes
> for syntax highlighting);
> * line numbers in the margin;
> * large chunks of text can be commented out easily;
> * I would love the powerful regex search/replace of vim and emacs
> with a somehwat simpler
>   (GUI-driven?) interface;
> * easy support for different utf planes;
> * customizable support for ConTeXt environments, commands, etc.,
> ConTeXt can be called from
>   within the editor with a simple shortcut.
>
> What I find useless:
>
> - I want an editor, not a pseudo operating system, so I don't need a
> shell within the editor;
> - I don't use spellchecking (too error-prone).
>
> Thomas (who still can't make up his mind whether he likes emacs +
> auctex or gvim better)
>
> On Mar 27, 2006, at 10:24 AM, Taco Hoekwater wrote:
>
> > Hi Jeffrey,
> >
> > Jeffrey Drake wrote:
> >> If you were going to use an editor for context usage (potentially
> >> integrated into a Context suite), what features would you like from
> >> it?
> >
> > * Good spellchecking, including private and special-purpose dicts.
> > * A re-wrap paragraph implementation that leaves lines that do not
> >    start with alphanumerics alone
> > * support for different input encodings, notably utf-8 and iso-latinX
> > * CRLF/LF/CR conversions
> > * regular expression search (&replace)
> > * configurable syntax highlighting
> > * adjustable font size
> > * support for large (log) files (>100MB)
> > * rectangle selection
> > * difference checking
> >
> >> Especially interested in what features in regular editors are quite
> >> useless to have around all the time. I tried the scite in the context
> >> mswindows distro, and didn't find it the most visually appealing and
> >> slightly cumbersome in configuration.
> >
> > I use emacs almost all the time, with SciTE slowly gaining ground.
> > SciTE is rather ok, but definately too minimalistic for my taste.
> >
> > These days I can do without gnus (nntp), vm (mail) and auctex, but I
> > use dired (file management), vc (revision control), gnuserv
> > (client|server interface), other-window|other-frame  (extra
> > windows/viewports) and the calendar|diary fulltime.
> >
> > Cheers, taco
> > _______________________________________________
> > ntg-context mailing list
> > ntg-context@ntg.nl
> > http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
>
> _______________________________________________
> ntg-context mailing list
> ntg-context@ntg.nl
> http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
>

Re: RFC: 'What would you like in an Text Editor?'

[Maurice Diamantini]

Le 27 mars 06 à 18:32, Jeffrey Drake a écrit :

> Thank you for both your replies. The thing I am looking at right now
> is using scintilla for the basis of a windows editor (windows api) and
> scripted with TCL.
>
> The interface I am envisioning is one of an old dos editor I used to
> use (called Programmer's Editor). It attached all functions to the
> function keys including menu navigation. But otherwise bindings to
> keys could easily be made. My thoughts are to implement most
> functionality in TCL, including configuration.

Very nice,
as an editer shouhd be scripting!

I think all the editor could be enterely be written in tcl
(easy to install, portability, ...)
You can see a very old editeur that I'm using every day
which could be enterely rewritten with the modern feature of tcl.

   http://www.ensta.fr/~diam/stead/distrib/snapshots/

-- Maurice


>>> * support for large (log) files (>100MB)
to big for stead !
I only play with 10MB with stead

Re: RFC: 'What would you like in an Text Editor?'

[Jeffrey Drake]

Ce serait probablement une bonne chose à s'assurer que le rédacteur
localise facilement.

I am using windows api with scintilla to keep it very small. But
otherwise using tcl. I am hoping to discover some very nice way for
editing interface. I might sometime do a Qt4 version for unix, but my
idea is to make this 'portable' so my flash drive would be ideally
suited for it.

- Jeff

On 3/27/06, Maurice Diamantini <mdiam@free.fr> wrote:
>
> Le 27 mars 06 à 18:32, Jeffrey Drake a écrit :
>
> > Thank you for both your replies. The thing I am looking at right now
> > is using scintilla for the basis of a windows editor (windows api) and
> > scripted with TCL.
> >
> > The interface I am envisioning is one of an old dos editor I used to
> > use (called Programmer's Editor). It attached all functions to the
> > function keys including menu navigation. But otherwise bindings to
> > keys could easily be made. My thoughts are to implement most
> > functionality in TCL, including configuration.
>
> Very nice,
> as an editer shouhd be scripting!
>
> I think all the editor could be enterely be written in tcl
> (easy to install, portability, ...)
> You can see a very old editeur that I'm using every day
> which could be enterely rewritten with the modern feature of tcl.
>
>    http://www.ensta.fr/~diam/stead/distrib/snapshots/
>
> -- Maurice
>
>
> >>> * support for large (log) files (>100MB)
> to big for stead !
> I only play with 10MB with stead
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ntg-context mailing list
> ntg-context@ntg.nl
> http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
>

Re: RFC: 'What would you like in an Text Editor?'

[frantisek holop]

hmm, on Mon, Mar 27, 2006 at 10:24:36AM +0200, Taco Hoekwater said that
> * Good spellchecking, including private and special-purpose dicts.
> * A re-wrap paragraph implementation that leaves lines that do not
>    start with alphanumerics alone
> * support for different input encodings, notably utf-8 and iso-latinX
> * CRLF/LF/CR conversions
> * regular expression search (&replace)
> * configurable syntax highlighting
> * adjustable font size
> * support for large (log) files (>100MB)
> * rectangle selection
> * difference checking

before this degenerates into a bloody emacs vs vim flame war :)
vim can do all this and more.  just as emacs.

i am a long time (what's it now, 9 or 10yrs) very happy vim user so i
can comment on vim.  there is quite a number of extensions for tex/latex
for vim on vim.org ranging from silly macros to complete suits with
integrated latex help using make for stepping thru all the errors
generated by the engines.  and one can always write one's own macros if
nothing is suitable :)  people on the vim mailing list are more than
friendly and literally starved for challenges :)

having said that i am a new context user and i don't know if there's
something specifically for context.

-f
-- 
to have a friend you must first be one.

Re: RFC: 'What would you like in an Text Editor?'

[Nikolai Weibull]

On 3/28/06, frantisek holop <minusf@obiit.org> wrote:
[Vim can basically do everything you want]
> having said that i am a new context user and i don't know if there's
> something specifically for context.

There's a syntax definition for ConTeXt.  It's going to be modified
for v7, as we're trying to consolidate all the TeXes.  I'm currently
maintaining the coretex.vim, plaintex.vim, and context.vim.

  nikolai