3 ms·
From a user's perspective, at least, I would think that language coverage would trump most other things when considering different highlighters.
by nex3 16y ago
From a user's perspective, at least, I would think that language coverage would trump most other things when considering different highlighters.
- twoism 16y agoTrue. However, working within our architecture and finding a good fit for most use cases was what trumped all else for the feature launch. I like the library we chose and hope it gains traction as a pure ruby highlighting lib but if for some reason it doesn't fit our users needs, we can certainly find a way to accommodate them.
- patio11 16y agoFrom a user's perspective, if your language is covered, you don't care about that guy on the Internets going all nerdrage on you because you do not support an obscure variant of Cobol with all commands written in romanized Arabic. Language popularity, like popularity for just about everything else, is a zipf distribution. Twenty languages probably covers well in excess of 99% of the people who will actually try to use this. You can't ever please him, and he's most likely to say "Pah, this isn't exactly what I want, I'm going to roll my own blog." (P.S.: the hard bitten product manager in me thinks that, from a user's perspective, the user can't program and this feature means nothing to her either way, and every second spent thinking about it is a second the business never gets back.)