Re: [dev] Re: Experimental editor

From: Connor Lane Smith <>
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 16:08:03 +0100

On 15 June 2011 15:54, Josh Rickmar <> wrote:
> Why not just keep the underlying sam the same (sam -d) but write a
> different samterm for it which does one window per buffer?

That question is where my editor started. The answer to "why not" is,
sam is ugly. A common misconception is that samterm just speaks the
same language as sam -d. It doesn't, it uses a custom binary protocol
and contains a lot of caching logic and so on. The protocol wasn't
designed before implementation, I think, and it was not designed with
writing an alternative samterm in mind. It's just a de facto protocol,
and imo it is quite broken.

After starting a few samterms over the past year I decided the
protocol is just too obscure, and we can make it a lot simpler just by
writing something from scratch. That way we can also take advantage of
the new back-end, allowing us to use interactive structural regular
expressions and so on. It's easier to write a new sam-inspired editor
than restrict ourselves to the samterm protocol. And that's what I'm
going to do, rolling in a few ideas from other editors as I go.

Received on Wed Jun 15 2011 - 17:08:03 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Wed Jun 15 2011 - 17:12:02 CEST