[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] Date Index Thread Index Search archive:
Date:Mon Aug 11 17:14:14 2003 
Subject:Re: poplog interactive mode - PS -> Syntax editor 
From:eas-lab 
Volume-ID:1030811.01 

>  eas-lab@absamail.co.za wrote:
> >>Thanks for your comments on Ved's shortcomings.  I've got some of
 
> >>>No syntax colorizing has to be the top one,
> > 
> > Ved is great, but,
> > I think a 'syntax editor' would be a killer application for poplog.
> 
 Chris Dollin <kers@hpl.hp.com> wrote: 
> "Killer" in the sense of making it stone dead, maybe ...
> 
> > I've never used/seen a visual-syntax-editor where one just picks
> > the required 'structures', but it always seemed absurd to have the
> > possibility of making syntax errors by allowing unconstrained
> > text entry.   How do these "visual things" work ?
> 
> My understanding is that all the syntax-editors that were tried
> failed in practice because they were instrinsically a right pain
> to use. People just don't think in terms of tree transformations,
> and often the convenient way to get from legal A to legal B is via
> illegal C, D, and E.
> 
Yes, if you want to dumb-down to be short-term popular, you must
let the kids just busk it, instead of learning to read the notes and
learn initially un-natural fingering.

> Having *help* to make syntactically correct structures is good.
> Having *help* to spot bad ones (without having to run the compiler
> explicitly) is good too. 

I speak without experience but I just looked at the syntax-diagrams and:
 why should I pick an "f" an "o" and an "r", when I can just pick a "for".
 Or better still, since it is 'not a choice', just pick a "for .....endfor".
 
> Saying "thou shalt edit trees and the
> leaves therof" seems to be a way of inducing first apoplexy and
> second skills in aiming for the wastebasket.
> 
That's very wordy/poetic. Can you be more scientific. 
Yes I agree this is a very fuzzy (right brained) subject.
> 
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.

Popular doesn't imply excellence.
There's a place for kiddies to interface via cartoons, and there's a place 
for those who are prepared to learn to "think in terms of" what is
proven to give long term results.

Based on my experience with 3 button mouse cording which takes
some initial learning investment, but which becomes a massively
powerful (reflex) control, and the (linux)mc/(DOS&Win)Norton-
Commander I believe that the investment in tool usage pays 
dividends.

I've never tried it (we all fear investing effort with no return)
but I suspect that emacs can do what I have in mind ?  I also suspect 
that the few emacs users who are drawing the benefits are happy
the 'fly in the fast lane' while the rest follow the popular way.

-- Chris Glur.