QUINTIN Guillaume | 23 Sep 18:14
Picon

Thanks for your anwsers and how do you want your text editor ?

Hi all,

I did not had time to thank you all for your answers on the thread
concerning LaTeX and typesetting systems.
I finally solved my issue, it was a problem with epstopdf and convert
from imagemagick.
When I have an eps picture with some dimensions,
=> on the computer at my work, convert conserve the dimensions of the
picture while epstopdf does not. It resizes the picture to A4 format.
=> At home my computer does exactly the contrary, epstopdf does
conserve dimensions while convert does not. It resizes the picture to
A4 format.
I use convert and epstopdf without arguments except the filenames, so
I don't why this behavior ! (Maybe cause I was stone or drunk or both
...)

$ convert mypic.eps mypic.pdf
$ epstopdf mypic.eps
On both PCs.

Maybe there is a difference between versions I don't know and I have
not searched deeper.
At home I have Archlinux and at work CentOS.

But anyway, the eps->pdf trick is not the main subject of my post.

I have seen on the suckless project ideas webpage that you wish to
have a "Yet another less sucking editor" (= YALSE ? or LSED ? or FALSE
? why not ?).

(Continue reading)

Jessta | 24 Sep 02:01
Picon
Gravatar

Re: Thanks for your anwsers and how do you want your text editor ?

On 24/09/2009, QUINTIN Guillaume <coincoin169g <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> Does YALSE have to support
>
> => a plugin system ? extensions ? scripting language (LUA ?) ? (so one
> can embed a terminal within YALSE)

No, it's a text editor. It edits text.

> => syntax highlighting ?
Sure, makes sense. But should be external from the editor in some way.

> => tabs ? many buffers ?
nope, want multiple tabs then open multiple instances

> => only basic features : cut, copy, paste, search, replace, inserting
> other text files ?
> => block selection ?
> => an (optional ?) GUI ?
> => ASCII only ? or UTF-8? and all? or many? character encodings ?

> => several modes like vi ? or like EMACS ? or an hybrid ? or like
> another editor ? vile ? nano ? (maybe the troll-able part)

I've always hated mode editors, I don't use vi because I end up
constantly typing in command mode and getting myself in to trouble.

> => costumizable shortcuts ?
Yeah, dwm style

> => ncurses ?
(Continue reading)

Dmitry Maluka | 24 Sep 11:19
Picon

Re: Thanks for your anwsers and how do you want your text editor ?

On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 10:01:38AM +1000, Jessta wrote:
> On 24/09/2009, QUINTIN Guillaume <coincoin169g <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> > Does YALSE have to support
> >
> > => a plugin system ? extensions ? scripting language (LUA ?) ? (so one
> > can embed a terminal within YALSE)
> 
> No, it's a text editor. It edits text.

It's easy to think like that, but let's think about: what is text
editing in itself? What if it's just managing characters on the screen,
for various purposes?
The Emacs principle "Everything is text" seems to be very reasonable.

(I know very little about Emacs, actually I never used it. It seems to
be very bloated but that's about an implementation, not an idea.)

About scripting: I think a useful text editor needs it. I can't live
without filetype detection, autoindenting, advanced navigation etc etc.
To keep the editor core simple and suckless, we need extensions support.
Text editing is a much more complex and unpredictable area than e.g.
managing windows or mails.

stanio | 24 Sep 10:42
Picon

Re: Thanks for your anwsers and how do you want your text editor ?

* Jessta <jessta <at> gmail.com> [2009-09-24 02:11]:
> On 24/09/2009, QUINTIN Guillaume <coincoin169g <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> > Does YALSE have to support
> >
> > => a plugin system ? extensions ? scripting language (LUA ?) ? (so one
> > can embed a terminal within YALSE)
> 
> No, it's a text editor. It edits text.

+1

> > => syntax highlighting ?
> Sure, makes sense. But should be external from the editor in some way.

+1 

> > => tabs ? many buffers ?
> nope, want multiple tabs then open multiple instances

+0.5 
no tabs but multiple buffers in 1 instance, so you can exchange/compare/etc
buffers 

> > => only basic features : cut, copy, paste, search, replace, inserting
> > other text files ?
> > => block selection ?
> > => an (optional ?) GUI ?
> > => ASCII only ? or UTF-8? and all? or many? character encodings ?
> 
> > => several modes like vi ? or like EMACS ? or an hybrid ? or like
(Continue reading)

Uriel | 24 Sep 14:43
Picon
Gravatar

Re: Thanks for your anwsers and how do you want your text editor ?

On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 10:42 AM,  <stanio <at> cs.tu-berlin.de> wrote:
>> > => several modes like vi ? or like EMACS ? or an hybrid ? or like
>> > another editor ? vile ? nano ? (maybe the troll-able part)
>>
>> I've always hated mode editors, I don't use vi because I end up
>> constantly typing in command mode and getting myself in to trouble.
>
> You'll never come to consensus on this.  My experience is that the
> emacs/vi/acme/whatever factorisation of the people is not in any way
> equivalent to any other preference factorisation (e.g. console vs GUI,
> suckmore vs suckless, jazz/pop/rock, or whatever). There must be a way to
> customize this.

Trying to be everything for everyone is the best recipe for failure.
Customization is the root of all evil.

>> > => ncurses ?
>> > => strictly nothing ?
>> > => a limited number of LOC ?
>> > => others libs ?
>> Ncurses is pretty sucky, so I vote it not to be a console application.
>
> X sucks even more .... I think, creating documents should be separate from
> viewing documents. My vote goes for console.

At least X is not based on emulating the behavior of hardware that was
already obsolete forty years ago.

uriel

(Continue reading)

Kris Maglione | 23 Sep 18:51
Picon

Re: Thanks for your anwsers and how do you want your text editor ?

On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 06:14:36PM +0200, QUINTIN Guillaume wrote:
>I do NOT want to begin a troll about VI vs EMACS vs WHATEVER.

Vi FTW! To hell with GNU bloatware. Except for SLIME. SLIME is 
rather nice.

--

-- 
Kris Maglione

Fashion is something barbarous, for it produces innovation without
reason and imitation without benefit.
	--George Santayana


Gmane