OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   RE: [xml-dev] Re: Auto-completion in editors

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

Yes.  Although the complexity of the application, 
the use of high level editing controls that are 
inserting library objects, and so on influence my 
decisions on this.  Different languages require 
different tools.  XML is great for the overall 
generic tool, but this falls apart in the crunch.

VRML is my best example. I need the IDE editor because:

1.  The files are very big typically, and it is 
hard to keep context in repeating objects.  Even 
then, using a brace-sensitive editor is good 
for some tasks.  Note the content is mostly long 
strings of comma or space delimited numbers.

2.  A character level sensitive app fails and 
hunting and counting brackets is time consuming. 
Although sometimes, it is easy to spot a mistake 
in the raw, it takes practice and much familiarity 
with the productions.

3.  I need the ability to build pieces then 
assemble these.  There are pluses and minuses. 
Unless one builds to precise measurements, the 
effect of transforming (moving into place) the 
local origin then scaling to size runs the 
performance of the piece into the ground.

4.  I need visual manipulation, that is, to 
grab the object in a rendered window and 
select an operation (eg, scale) to eyeball 
the results.  I need to visually inspect 
library components and select them for 
inclusion.  See 3 for problems with that, 
so optimizers are vital.

Note that there are multiple articles from 
comp.text.sgml on this topic but that was 
when markup was primarily, almost exclusively, 
used for text document editing to hand off to 
a batch renderer.  We typically started out 
with a structural editor, but as we got to know 
the structures, moved to the venerable ASCII editor 
for speed.  Sometimes, debugging is easier that 
way given a parser that provides accurate line 

Also, intellisensible IDE editors often 
try to *help* and do things like putting in the 
quotes before one wants them, so when cutting and 
pasting, it's easy to stuff the right thing into 
the obscurely wrong place.  That said, given a 
rather large and complex application language 
(eg, Schema), I use both most productively.  


Andrzej Jan Taramina:

I believe this is a situation that somewhat parallels the use of IDE's in the 
programming world.  Most experienced and highly productive developers (in 
my observations) use a decent editor (emacs, JPadPro, SlickEdit, or even vi) 
coupled with a debugger.  Graphical IDE's tend to be slow, bulky and just get 
in the way for experienced developers (having built many hyper-performance 
development teams).  IDE's hold out the marketing promise of turning a 
junior/intermediate/less experienced developer into a veteran hotshot.  
Unfortunately the marketing hype does not deliver in the real world. Caveat 
Emptor reins supreme.

My two cents worth....


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS