[Ohrrpgce] SVN: james/3886 a work-in-progress editor definition file

[James Paige]

On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 10:15:30PM -0400, Mike Caron wrote:
> On 10/14/2010 22:13, James Paige wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 10:07:03PM -0400, Mike Caron wrote:
>>> On 10/14/2010 0:07, James Paige wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 08:27:34PM -0700, Jay Tennant wrote:
>>>>>> From: James Paige<Bob at HamsterRepublic.com>
>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 9:36 PM
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 07:23:23PM -0700, subversion at HamsterRepublic.com wrote:
>>>>>>> james
>>>>>>> 2010-10-13 19:23:23 -0700 (Wed, 13 Oct 2010)
>>>>>>> 42
>>>>>>> a work-in-progress editor definition file
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am pretty happy with the RELOAD Editor. Has anybody else tried it yet?
>>>>>> (CTRL+R from the main menu in custom)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However, I am seriously considering making an actual
>>>>>> editor-editor-editor. It would be similar to the RELOAD editor except it
>>>>>> would strictly enforce the structure of a .editor file, and would
>>>>>> automate the creation of each widget type.
>>>>>
>>>>> Forgive my nescience, but why do you need or want an editor-editor-editor?
>>>>> Isn't that like a pointer to a pointer to a pointer?
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for making me google "nescience". I am now that much less
>>>> nescient.
>>>>
>>>> I know the idea of an editor-editor-editor *sounds* crazy, especially
>>>> since I have not actually started the editor-editor yet, but in the
>>>> course of planning and preparing the editor-editor, I have come to
>>>> believe that an editor-editor-editor might be exactly the right amount
>>>> of indirection to trigger a cascade of awesomeness.
>>>>
>>>> Although maybe I am confusaing things by calling it the
>>>> editor-editor-editor. In my mind I have been calling the interpreter for
>>>> the editor definition files the "editor-editor" so a tool to create
>>>> those files is the editor-editor-editor, but really I should drop a
>>>> level of the indirection in my *name* of this thing.
>>>>
>>>> just simply "editor-editor" is a better description of what I have been
>>>> talking about when I say "editor-editor-editor"
>>>
>>> I was thinking about the RELOAD format today, and I realized that it
>>> could be made more efficient, if we produced a "manifest" of sorts,
>>> describing the valid contents of a RELOAD document. We could use it to
>>> optimize and validate certain operations.
>>>
>>> I think we could use JSON to describe it... Actually, no. It would be
>>> more efficient if we created a new binary format for this. Maybe...
>>> Markup Extra Transcription of Additions. Yes, that should work.
>>>
>>> And, of course, you can add a new editor-editor-editor editor to edit it.
>>>
>>> Oh, but how are we going to mark that up? Hmm... Editor Language DRaft
>>> Information Transcription CHannel, edited in the
>>> editor-editor-editor-editor editor of course!
>>
>> I... can't... telllll if you are teasing me or not!...
>
> I'm teasing both of us :D

And the fact that I had to ask means you did it well :)

---
James