RE: Domain Specific Languages

[Nick Trout <Nick.Trout@...>]

> From: Philippe Lhoste [mailto:PhiLho@gmx.net]
> > By the time you've added all the complexity and bulk of an 
> XML parser and
> 
> Why an XML parser? There is already an XML lexer, enough for syntax
> highlighting. SciTE isn't a pure XML editor.

I thought you were suggesting serialising SciTE properties using XML. That
looks like a mistake, sorry.


> I haven't used zlib yet, but I am not sure it is so complex 
> to add in its
> DLL form. Or shared library. Now I can be wrong.

I dont see the point of adding zlib just to edit files from compressed
archives. This is a none general feature added to a nice simple editor. It
would make more sense to add scripting to the editor and run a script which
unzips an archive and presents you with the file, then does the reverse when
you are finished. You could always just run a batch file to open files like
this. In addition it adds a library dependency to an easily distributable
single executable editor. Perhaps you could use zip magic (or WinXP?).


> indent.size.*.lua=4
> tab.size.*.lua=4
> use.tabs.*.lua=1
> for example. Where is the problem?

Great. This wasnt working when I last looked and I cant see it easily in the
change log for the last few versions. I see there was a new version out
yesterday as well.


> Well, adding Lua, or actually any scripting language via a 
> stub DLL, is in
> the list of things to do. The trouble is, the list is pretty 
> long, and the
> time quite short :-)
> Configuring SciTE with Lua was tested by Neil Hodgson quite 
> some time ago,
> and was dropped because he though there was no interest in 
> it. Too bad.

I understand about the time. I am frequently frustrated in my own projects
by higher priority tasks and lack of time. I am grateful for the excellent
little editor and would love to see Lua embedded, rather than added as a
DLL. I looked into this a while ago but there was some complication with
just adding Lua. 

Nick