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

[James Paige]

On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 10:25:25PM -0400, Mike Caron wrote:
> On 10/14/2010 22:23, James Paige wrote:
>> 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 :)
>
> The sad part is that it only took me a few moments to come up with the  
> acronyms... Maybe my destiny is to make meta-file formats?! Nooo....

You should work for NASA. Acronyms are their mission.

---
James