<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: Strip SIG on reply



On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 08:54:56AM -0500, Thomas Dickey wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, David Yitzchak Cohen wrote:

> > > Yes.  There's also a recent nvi which does UTF-8 (though I haven't tried
> > > that).
> >
> > really?  nvi is suddenly starting to sound like a much more interesting
> > option ... does it do compile-time remapping of the command keyboard, too?
> > (i.e., is it usable on Dvorak without that map insanity?)
> 
> probably not.

bummer ... I wonder if it's relatively straightforward hacking it to
(as it was with elvis). . .

> It doesn't do syntax highlighting either.

I don't care: syntax highlighting is nearly always useless in exactly
the convoluted code where you need it, and totally redundant in nearly
all other cases.

> Though I recall
> it does character classes (and seem to recall that vim lagged in that area
> by a couple of years).

I don't care much about that, since elvis doesn't either.

> > > (Most of the time I run vim any more is to compare
> > > bugs in the syntax highlighting).
> >
> > Don't bother comparing it to elvis'; elvis sucks at hilighting syntax.
> 
> however, the motivation for vim developers implementing highlighting was
> to do what elvis was doing.  Doing it with runtime regular expressions was
> the innovative part (though it has its own limitations, as illustrated by
> the Byzantine set of special operations).

The only authoritative source for answers to "what's this thing?" is
the compiler itself.  Since only the tokenizer, preprocessor, and a
tiny bit of logic are needed to properly classify _everything_, the
compiler doesn't have to do a whole lot before producing the XML document.
I'd much rather have syntax highlighting that's always guaranteed to be
correct or none at all; this take-me-with-a-grain-of-salt highlighting I
find more annoyance than use, and any scheme that's capable of failing
will always fail exactly when you need it to work right, as the sage
Murphy pointed out ages ago.

 - Dave

-- 
Uncle Cosmo, why do they call this a word processor?
It's simple, Skyler.  You've seen what food processors do to food, right?

Please visit this link:
http://rotter.net/israel

Attachment: pgpqKCr2NVRlQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature