eas-lab@absamail.co.za wrote:
> Chris Dollin <kers@hpl.hp.com> wrote:
>> I can type `for` faster than I can reach for the mouse and make a
>> selection. I can type `fo <completion>` faster than I can type
>> `for do endfor`. At least, it *feels* that way. Of course syntax
>> editors need not be mouse-driven - I only recall ones that were,
>> but that doesn't prove anything.
>>
> Key-board vs. 'heads up flying' is a separate issue; where 'heads up'
> allows you to position the cursor to a different task-window immediately
> [for a serious poplog session, I end up with 6 terminals - got to take
> notes & search existing files etc.]
6 terminals or 6 windows? Also, I don't know what your "heads up flying"
distinction is about.
> I don't even KNOW about <completion>.
It's whatever you have to type to do completion in the editor. I don't
have it, but it would be easy to implement in ved (pick a boring key
sequence, bind it to a function that looks left for a word, looks it
up in a completion table, and fills in the found template.)
> Is <completion> not a type of 'syntax editor' ?
Dunno. It depends entirely on what you mean by "syntax editor" (which was
a point I implied in earlier postings). It doesn't fit *my* use and
understanding of the term; it's assistance, not compulsion. It's not
the only way to compose a program, it's a handy way to avoid typing.
> Does it also insert the mandatory 'closing bracket' for the construct(s) ?
Of course.
>> Perhaps we mean different things by the term "syntax editing"?
Yes, there.
> If there are < 6 possible choices at some stage of the source text,
> I don't want to have to think/remember, but just select.
Are there such places? Not many of them, surely.
>> > The desire for freedom to type in near-english dialog to the
>> > machine is part of the 'little man in the box' illusion - a curse.
>>
>> I'm sorry, but that's just silly. Fiddling around with syntax editors
>> is just as much a "little man in the box" illusion as typing nowhere-
>> near-English non-dialogue text is. Presumably you were aiming for
>> the same poetic license as I was ...
>>
> I'll go further, and say that the virtuosi gypsy violinist hates the
> pop-in-dumbed-down music box, which devalues his 'typing skills'.
You've lost me. Is the violinist the man in the box?
> Imagine if when entering a lift/elevator, you had to type in 'near
> english' instead of just selecting one of n buttons.
Well, I'm imagining it. It would be a dreadful interface. Am *I*
the man in the box?
>> You certainly *want* some syntax-oriented operations in an editor.
>> That's a far cry from forcing them on people.
>
> Sure. After a bit of practice, one doesn't look at the menues
> when pounding the key-board for spreadsheets
I wouldn't know. Are these mouse-menus or key-menus? 'Cos, you see,
when someone says "menu" I assume "mouse menu". Mice menus are evil
because mousing is a distraction. Key menus are just typing.
--
Chris "electric hedgehog" Dollin
C FAQs at: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/by-newsgroup/comp/comp.lang.c.html
C welcome: http://www.angelfire.com/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc.html
|