🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <030120011247039081%carol@carolginsbergbrown.com>, Carol 
Ginsberg Brown <carol@carolginsbergbrown.com> wrote:

> Anyone have a
> satisfactory solution for a keyboard-only configurable editor that's
> tightly integrated with the IDE? 

Alpha is rather like emacs in some respects (although it's not a port). 
Very customizeable. Oodles of key bindings. CodeWarrior integration is 
generally very good (I'm currently working on that to improve some areas 
that have gotten flakey).


<http://alpha.olm.net/>

with the very latest versions available at

<ftp://ftp.ucsd.edu/pub/alpha/>

-- 
Jonathan E. Guyer

<http://www.his.com/jguyer/>

In article <030120011247039081%carol@carolginsbergbrown.com>, Carol 
Ginsberg Brown <carol@carolginsbergbrown.com> wrote:

> Hi. I'd like to use a text editor with CodeWarrior (6.0) that allows me
> to keep my hands on the keyboard (much like my beloved gnu emacs for
> Unix). This means extensive cursor control and text selection options
> with customizable key bindings. I've looked at the CW editor that's
> part of the IDE and also BBEdit but their commands are limited and/or
> customization is limited. The emacs ports to the Mac aren't tightly
> integrated with the IDE (another requirement). Anyone have a
> satisfactory solution for a keyboard-only configurable editor that's
> tightly integrated with the IDE? 
> 
> Any advice in this regard would be greatly appreciated.
> 
> Thanks,
> Carol

Jon Guyer will probably show up on this thread with the same suggestionl 
(especially now that I've invoked his name). You might want to look into 
Alpha <http://alpha.olm.net/>, it even has an emacs mode.

Aaron

>> Hi. I'd like to use a text editor with CodeWarrior (6.0) that allows me
>> to keep my hands on the keyboard (much like my beloved gnu emacs for
>> Unix). This means extensive cursor control and text selection options
>> with customizable key bindings. I've looked at the CW editor that's
>> part of the IDE and also BBEdit but their commands are limited and/or
>> customization is limited. The emacs ports to the Mac aren't tightly
>> integrated with the IDE (another requirement). Anyone have a
>> satisfactory solution for a keyboard-only configurable editor that's
>> tightly integrated with the IDE?
>> 

Boy, am I with you! I dearly miss my gnu environment :-(

> 
> Jon Guyer will probably show up on this thread with the same suggestionl
> (especially now that I've invoked his name). You might want to look into
> Alpha <http://alpha.olm.net/>, it even has an emacs mode.
> 

I chk'd out 'alpha' some time ago, and turned away w/o trying it for the
following reasons:

1) tcl based; could NOT port my old lisp functions

2) tcl based; every thing that I've had experience with that was based on
tcl was very difficult to keep running; update a library, and everything
breaks; TOO MUCH hacking going on there for me.

I've been wrong before ... Maybe you could convince me that it is worth
trying!

- harry

In article <030120011247039081%carol@carolginsbergbrown.com>, Carol 
Ginsberg Brown <carol@carolginsbergbrown.com> wrote:

> Hi. I'd like to use a text editor with CodeWarrior (6.0) that allows me
> to keep my hands on the keyboard (much like my beloved gnu emacs for
> Unix). This means extensive cursor control and text selection options
> with customizable key bindings. I've looked at the CW editor that's
> part of the IDE and also BBEdit but their commands are limited and/or
> customization is limited. The emacs ports to the Mac aren't tightly
> integrated with the IDE (another requirement). Anyone have a
> satisfactory solution for a keyboard-only configurable editor that's
> tightly integrated with the IDE? 

Pepper comes with optional emacs keybindings and it communicates with 
the Codewarrior IDE.

-maarten

--
http://www.hekkelman.com/                  Have a Pepper too

In article <B679E23D.10AB%developer.NO.SPAM@plate.net>, Harry Plate 
<developer.NO.SPAM@plate.net> wrote:

> I chk'd out 'alpha' some time ago, and turned away w/o trying it for the
> following reasons:
> 
> 1) tcl based; could NOT port my old lisp functions
> 
> 2) tcl based; every thing that I've had experience with that was based on
> tcl was very difficult to keep running; update a library, and everything
> breaks; TOO MUCH hacking going on there for me.

Crikey! It's just a language. I just got done schooling a Tcl biggot who 
was ranting about his perception of flaws in AppleScript. IT'S JUST A 
LANGUAGE. If it does what you need, use it. If it doesn't, don't.

Alpha is based on Tcl. 
Alpha is not emacs.

Alpha does share some bindings with emacs, as well as a philosophy of 
massive user customizability. The integration with CodeWarrior has been 
a bit flakey for the last few releases of Alpha, but I'm working on it.

-- 
Jonathan E. Guyer

<http://www.his.com/jguyer/>