RE: "Adobe Brackets like" editing in emacs

[arthur miller <arthur.miller@live.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3462 bytes --]

> EZ> I don't get it: switching between adjacent windows is a single
> EZ> keystroke away (bind it to a key, if you are annoyed by "C-x o")Of course it is not difficult to switch between windows with a shortcut or C-x o, but look att this way:

It is not difficult to press 'v' to enter "visual mode" or 'i' to enter insert mode in Vim. Yet, we take it for granted
in almost all modern text editors that certain features are always "present". No new editor is constructed
to not be able to edit text in "immidiate mode" if I may call it so.

If you look back at requested feature, instead of pressing C-x o to switch to another buffer, one press 
(hypotetically) C-x e, and the correct file with correct position opens under the cursor. 

Before one can use C-x o, user has to open correct file and split window, and than once switched to another
buffer, find the right spot in the file. Now imagine if all of those small steps are gone, and we can open 
say main file, and from there automatically be pointed to correct files and positions in file on request as needed.

It may be possible with just a minor mode; I would be fine with that too, I am just looking for functionality, not the looks,
albeit looks might be helpful to make less distraction.

It is just some thoughts :).

> Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 18:28:44 +0200
> From: eliz@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: "Adobe Brackets like" editing in emacs
> To: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> > From: Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com>
> > Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 02:23:55 -0400
> > 
> > EZ> I don't get it: switching between adjacent windows is a single
> > EZ> keystroke away (bind it to a key, if you are annoyed by "C-x o").
> > 
> > I have, but looking in *two* places is a kind of context switch and
> > clutters the display with more windows.
> 
> How is another window different from having contents of another file
> inserted into the same window?  The only difference is the mode line
> between them -- is that really such a big deal?
> 
> > I also use `last-buffer' a lot, but that's also a context switch.
> 
> Nothing a simple minor mode couldn't handle.
> 
> > EZ> Sounds over-engineering to me.  At the very least, I would suggest a
> > EZ> fully-functional prototype that uses adjacent windows, before we
> > EZ> decide if some other UI feature is needed.
> > 
> > You're asking for a fully-functional prototype of an alternative UI
> > because a possible UI sounds like overengineering to you after a brief
> > discussion?
> 
> I didn't ask for anything.  I suggested to have this feature first
> based on the existing infrastructure, i.e. in another window.  This
> should be easy to implement, and will allow collecting user experience
> which we currently lack.  Then decision of whether we need a new UI,
> and which one, will be based on something, rather than on thin air.
> 
> Look at this another way: someone suggests that we adopt a "cool
> feature" seen in another editor.  That editor is for editing HTML
> (which is hardly the main focus of Emacs), and the specific feature we
> are discussing here is not the only one, maybe even not the most
> important one, in Brackets -- just look at the videos on their site.
> Suddenly we are all sure this will be seemingly cool for editing C/C++
> etc., but still insist that the UI feature should look and feel the
> same, without even trying.  Does this make a lot of sense?
> 
 		 	   		  

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4045 bytes --]