4 ms·

For an editor built from the ground up using LuaJIT see https://howl.io https://howl.io [/plug]

• sillysaurus3 9y ago
  The docs are pretty. What do you use to generate e.g. https://howl.io/doc/spec/interact_spec.html https://howl.io/doc/spec/interact_spec.html ?
  • shalabhc 9y ago
    Thank you. I believe the tests are converted to HTML by a custom Ruby script: https://github.com/howl-editor/howl/blob/master/site/bin/spec2html https://github.com/howl-editor/howl/blob/master/site/bin/spe... The manual and API docs are hand written in markdown.
• stevekemp 9y ago
  If we're plugging things that can benefit from LuaJIT: I wrote a console-based mail-client, kinda like mutt, which uses Lua for all the scripting and UI. https://lumail.org/ https://lumail.org/ New release will be out in a few days.
• omaranto 9y ago
  The documentation could use a section explaining what Howl has to offer over other text editors than are extensible using Lua, such as Textadept (https://foicica.com/textadept/ https://foicica.com/textadept/).
  • shalabhc 9y ago
    Good point. It's hard to highlight certain differences because it's a very different editor. In general I think Howl offers a better API and a more keyboard centric UI compared to Textadept. Most commands are operated via the command line which offers auto-complete (vs operating via the menu bar, with custom dialog boxes for each command). Howl also doesn't use Scintilla (Textadept does) and is not subject to Scintilla's limits.