3 ms·
I agree with your "too much fragmentation" argument. Although I think a better solution would be this: 1. Define a common API to text editors. It would have st
by sophacles 16y ago
I agree with your "too much fragmentation" argument. Although I think a better solution would be this:
1. Define a common API to text editors. It would have stuff like "change text at" and "highlight line" and so on. Going the other direction there would be a set of well defined events like "text changed" and "do X", and so on.
2. Convince tool makers to write to this api rather than a specific editor.
3. Enjoy awesome source tools from any darn editor you want.
(Also, IDEs don't go away, they become the gui layer in editor/plugin interaction. This is not a small role!)
- brianobush 16y agowasn't this what elisp was for, albeit it is very emacs centric.
- sophacles 16y agoElisp is the inverse of what I am talking about... it is a special purpose language to take advantage of a specific editor. I am talking about a well defined generic interface that allows for all editors to tie nicely with code-tools.