From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.tex.context/25425 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ville Voipio Newsgroups: gmane.comp.tex.context Subject: Re: Text wrapping in SciTE Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 10:55:11 +0200 Message-ID: <43D0A56F.7010605@kpatents.com> References: Reply-To: mailing list for ConTeXt users NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1137747438 6246 80.91.229.2 (20 Jan 2006 08:57:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 08:57:18 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl Fri Jan 20 09:57:16 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gctc-ntg-context-518@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from ronja.vet.uu.nl ([131.211.172.88] helo=ronja.ntg.nl) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ezs52-0003BQ-92 for gctc-ntg-context-518@m.gmane.org; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 09:57:12 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0E7812843; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 09:57:11 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from ronja.ntg.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.ntg.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 16957-04; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 09:57:11 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from ronja.vet.uu.nl (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id C76B31285B; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 09:55:19 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49C3A1285B for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 09:55:18 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from ronja.ntg.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.ntg.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 16957-03 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 09:55:17 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from mail.kpatents.com (mail.kpatents.com [195.170.128.67]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with SMTP id 4735912843 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 09:55:11 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: (qmail 5782 invoked from network); 20 Jan 2006 08:55:11 -0000 Original-Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.100.157?) (192.168.100.157) by 192.168.100.1 with SMTP; 20 Jan 2006 08:55:11 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en Original-To: mailing list for ConTeXt users In-Reply-To: X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ntg.nl X-BeenThere: ntg-context@ntg.nl X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: mailing list for ConTeXt users List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl Errors-To: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ntg.nl Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.tex.context:25425 Archived-At: > I was wondering what is the correct way of wrapping text while typing in > SciTE. SciTE can wrap the text, but it is basically a virtual wrap, it is > a long line tailored to the view of your editing window. On the other hand > you can wrap the lines yourself by pressing enter wherever you think it is > necessary. Which one of these methods is better? Or maybe there are better > alternatives? I use the "one long line per paragraph" approach. The reason is simple: it is fairly simple to wrap the lines afterwards. It is far from simple to unwrap them if you have the hard line breaks. Also, with soft (or virtual) wrapping you can add or remove text without any hassle. So, I cannot figure out any common situation where hard formatting would be significantly better. Just my two eurocents. - Ville