[TxMt] Nested snippets

[Charilaos Skiadas]

On May 20, 2005, at 8:17 AM, Brad Miller wrote:

> Haris,
>
> I find that I rarely make it through a multi-part snippet without 
> doing something that breaks me out of snippet-tab-mode.  Then I fill 
> in the rest of the snippet template by navigating to the pieces in the 
> usual way.  Maybe I just have an unusually short attention span, or I 
> am an exceptionally erratic typist, not sure.

I also cannot work with a snippet that has more than two tabs, and 
that's already too much :-)
> Anyway, usually by the end of the first template variable I've managed 
> to get it so that tabs are just tabs.
>
> I think that in a \begin \end environment like the one in your 
> example, the $0 between the begin/end is the way to go. Usually people 
> are going to do a fair amount of typing in between.
>
> I think its important to remember that Snippets help two completely 
> different classes of user.
>
> 1. Novices -- advanced beginners:  Snippets help them create basic 
> language constructs that they otherwise don't know how to do without 
> spending time in the manual.  How do I make a table?  How do I insert 
> a figure? etc.  These users are most likely going to select snippets 
> from the menu.
>
> To this end, I'd like to see Allan add the ability to create 
> categories and subcategories of snippets that result in menus/submenus 
> if snippets.  IMHO the snippets menu is useless for languages like 
> Actionscript and OCaml because there are too many entries (screens of 
> them)

I think this is a great idea. The way things are, I'm afraid to add too 
many snippets so as not to overload the menu. Btw, how much of a 
concern is the size of the bundle? Does adding a lot of snippets affect 
performance? If not, then I could try to add as many LaTeX commands as 
snippets as possible, or at least commands I think are likely to be 
often used.

> 2. language power users : These users already know the syntax for 
> creating a table, the snippet is just helping this class of users go 
> faster.  These users are going to use tab completion.  These users are 
> going to be most annoyed when things don't behave logically.  (at 
> least as far as they understand the workings of things)
>
> Here's the one that annoys me the most:  (and I've just now figured 
> out how to fix it since I've been writing this email :-) )
>
[snip]
>
> Now, I've modified my copy of itemize to be:
> \begin{itemize}
>   \item ${0:premier item}
> \end{itemize}
>
> Now things behave like I would like them to. I think I'll commit this 
> new itemize, and fix up the other list making environments as well.

This sounds more appropriate to me too. I can't remember if I edited 
it, or if someone else did, but I would guess whoever did it might have 
had the html lists in mind, where a simple return would not cut it. But 
I guess Command-return takes care of that now and is pretty intuitive. 
(btw, command-return is bound to <br /> in html. Do we really want 
that?)

> As to your other question about theorems and definitions, I say add 
> them so that they are there to help people get better with Latex.

Great, I'll edit them a bit and add them to the bundle, and people can 
adjust them as they see fit.
On this respect, it might make sense to create a template for amsart, 
with these definitions included. Maybe a project for me for the 
weekend...

> Brad
>
Haris
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/enriched
Size: 3432 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.macromates.com/textmate/attachments/20050520/91af165f/attachment.bin>