Re: [dev] Experimental editor

On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 02:18:01PM +0100, David Tweed wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Kurt H Maier <karmaflux_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 4:15 AM, David Tweed <david.tweed_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
> >> I'm going to assume that what you mean by "The editor doesn't need to
> >> do this." is "the computer user doesn't benefit from having undo in
> >> the editor rather than a version control";
> >
> > invalid assumption.  what he meant was 'the EDITOR doesn't need to do
> > this; some other piece of software can do it FOR the editor'
>
> The various subtlties in what he could have meant was precisely what I
> was trying to get a clarification of. (It seemed silly to wait for a
> round trip delay before proceeding to the conversation.) It's not

I might concede another keybinding for undo/redo, since that'd still
keep us under 10 keybindings. But it still seems rather luxurious nor
should the editor (the software) be tasked with *very much* having to
do with revision control---certainly cut-and-paste and managing
buffers should be offloaded to the surrounding environment (be it X or
tmux).

On a related note: one-file-per-editor-instance, period.

I guess I'm arguing for an anti-emacs editor which is mode-less. Oh, wait,
I'm arguing for joe. Go joe!

Best,
Peter

-- 
sic dicit magister P
PhD Candidate
Collaborative Programme in Ancient and Medieval Philosophy
University of Toronto
http://individual.utoronto.ca/peterjh