Re: [dev] Experimental editor

From: David Tweed <>
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 09:54:53 +0100

On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 9:51 AM, David Tweed <> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Nicolai Waniek <> wrote:
>> On 06/17/2011 10:37 AM, markus schnalke wrote:
>>> For the same reason we want Unix's manifold toolchain and for the same
>>> reason we want several programming languages: Because ``One fits all''
>>> is an illusion.
>> Then try to figure out some basic tools that you can glue together to
>> form a fully functional editor.
>> 'Reinventing' an editor for every purpose and most probably copying some
>> things on source level from one editor to the next is ridiculous.
> Even more annoying is that the way that the lack of an OS-level editor
> component means that there's a tendency for any application that wants
> to provide a writing/editing capability to write their own, often
> poor, editing code. I entirely agree with that "one interface fits all
> users" is a problem, but I'd like a system where there was "one
> interface for editing in all circumstances for this user".

To clarify, I by "OS-level component" I mean at the "this is THE
component applications use when the want editing", but which would be
changeable by the user. (If you've seen things like the historical
Oberon OS, that kind of thing.)

> cheers, dave tweed

cheers, dave tweed__________________________
computer vision reasearcher:
"while having code so boring anyone can maintain it, use Python." --
attempted insult seen on slashdot
Received on Fri Jun 17 2011 - 10:54:53 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Fri Jun 17 2011 - 11:00:08 CEST