Re: [dev] my compatible ideas: vim like mapping for any tools, C scripts, vi clone

From: mobi phil <>
Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 22:53:05 +0200

> Yes another sucking bloated program.
I hope you did not suck your vodka already.. I think you are so fixed
on this suck, that you fail to see the forest from the trees.

> On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 07:21:18PM +0200, mobi phil wrote:
>> When you are looking some functions or some patters you use grep,
>> isn't it?  Each time you do grep, the file is loaded into memory, you
>> do the next grep again, etc.
> No. It's piped into grep. Pipes are cheap.

and why would you be obsessed so much about pipes. Do the form of
pipes create you some special mental state? Why would you call it
bloat calling a function from grep and you do not call bloat when you
do pipe? You do pipe or you call a function it is part of the same
computer, it uses the same memory, the same processor. Pipe suck more
than calling a function! You are trying to defend those badly written
blackboxes, that had zero reusability in mind? Why did you never try
to call a function in grep? Because everybody was obsessed about
pipes. Nobody could see the forest from the tree!

>> There are things that make sense to embedd, but in case of an editor
>> you need to have stuff inside the same process. Any data exchange
>> between processes would slow down operations...

> Do you really feel that latency? Don't you feel accretive complexity? If you have to pipe 100 bytes for sure not. But processing 400MB of data through pipes: YES!!!! try it.

>> >> * It would have a fast internal ctags like browser.
>> >
>> > Unless your code is all bunched in one huge file, you know what you're
>> > looking for.
>> > Just use a search function? Or call ctags and filter the output to a terminal,
>> > say if you wanted a function list.

>> you would call each time ctags when you made changes? Why don't you
>> want to have stuff up to date?
yes! what is your problem with that? maybe your imagination is
limited? Or you like to keep yourself busy with useless details? Did
not say to run ctags on the full raw data, but on parts that have

> Because my working environment remains simple and controllable. Bind a
> keystroke to update tags. Don't you complain that your web browser does
> not reload a page automatically every 5 seconds so you have to do it
> manually?
I would complain if it would be the case. Websites that need to do
that they do. I hate google, but gmail is a web application, and does
reload of WHAT IS NECESSARY. So I do not have to do reload. If I would
have to do reload in gmail, I would move to the next... The simplest
way to keep your working environment simple is not to start your
computer. I hate bloat probably more than you, but this does not mean
that I am open for NEW.

>> I am vim user, but often miss derived
>> views that eclipse like tool present..

> I piss on all those "modern IDEs" that consider themselves to be smarter
> than me.
you see... instead of thinking, you express your frustration or your
bad experience with any employer who wanted to force you to use modern
IDEs. If I would love those IDE's, I would move there and basta. But I
want to use the minimal what they offer... as idea...

>> If the design is good, you could easilly inject any kind of
>> scripting language to command the core.

> Yeah, it's easy. Keeping simple is hard.
Well, how many time do you preach this sentence one day? Why do you
think that other people would be so idiot, that would not know such an
obvious think?

>> Imagine if you would break a compiler into pieces, one that would read
>> the buffer, the other would tokenize, the 3rd would do syntactical
>> analisys etc.. and you would pipe them..

> The first one is cat? )))
Did you ever compile a project with more than 10 lines of code?

mobi phil

being mobile, but including technology
Received on Fri May 14 2010 - 20:53:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Fri May 14 2010 - 21:00:03 UTC