Quote:
Originally Posted by dmikov
I have to disagree with you on this one. Easy macro languages are hardest to learn, they are usually proprietary to one piece of software and there fore hard rationalize investing too much time into. Add to it, that vbscript or jscript or ruby or etc has oh around thousands books to learn and NoteTab or whatever < 1, situation becomes even more hard on developer to support it.
I like notepad++ and ultraedit. I would use notepad++ since it's free and has good plugins, but I am using ultraedit since on top of macro language (which both have) it has scripting with a normal language.
I think Microsoft Office can be commanded for at least this accomplishment of including nice scripting capability. Hate their code storage paradigm though.
|
Well, it looks like Valloric is settled, or close to settled. But my compulsions drive me to answer this.
1) "Easy macro languages are hardest to learn..."
Read that a few times. It still makes no sense. It's up-is-downism, that pseudo-rationalizes some other point.
2) "...they are usually proprietary to one piece of software and there fore hard rationalize investing too much time into."
This is your real point. And it supports exactly the point I was making in my argument. You are a programmer already, as is Valloric. You think like programmers, and want to leverage your knowledge. (I am not belittling the time and effort it took you to learn your skills. I think programmers are awesome.)
My point is that while it might be nice for everyone to learn Python in order to successfully (or adequately) program macros for the editor, it won't happen. Programmers will do it. A few hardy souls will do it. And most people won't. The first step has to be easier than that, thus making (or leaving) people dependent. ("Would somebody please write a macro that...?")
3) I wasn't suggesting recreating or cloning the NoteTab Clip language. I think that the method of
creating and
accessing the macros is great --
and the language is easy to learn. Factors that I hope can be extracted from observing it.
Okay, I'm done. I see your point, understand your motivations, acknowledge the value of efficiency (and not wanting to recreate the wheel.) It's all good. I may even learn Python, if I'm feeling hardy and I have time.
Feel free to school me -- I'll read it, but I won't respond as I don't think that I should argue any further as it would no longer be polite.
m a r