[TxMt] Re: Changing cursor position from command

[Jacob Rus]

Juan <juanfc at ...> writes:
> Nop.  It should be great to have an API to access TM interface from  
> the scripts, shouldn't be?
> 
> ;)

Hi there,

I really don't mean to sound like a jerk.  But your continuing to say this (I
think this is the 5th email about it, in addition to at least one ticket) is
just getting annoying.  A couple of comments:

 1. Allan already knows that there are things which require hooks
    into other parts of the application, and cannot therefore be
    done currently without a plugin.

 2. If we examine this state of affairs logically, and try to
    figure out *why* it might be the case, we find the following
    possibilities.
    
      * It's possible there are other areas of the application he
        feels are more essential.  In this case, continually
        repeating "API, API, API" just distracts him from these
        other features, preventing him from ever getting to work
        on the API you want.

      * It's possible that Allan doesn't like giving bundle items
        such general power.  Maybe he feels that we'd end up with
        a system of commands that looks like emacs, which is arcane
        and vastly more complicated than TextMate's (more
        effective, and more *usefully* flexible) extension 
        mechanisms.  In this case whining just makes Allan annoyed,
        without increasing your chances.

      * It's possible that Allan hasn't decided how he wants to
        present such increased functionality to users.  For
        instance, allowing conditinals and loops inside macros
        is the only thing technically needed to have the power
        you are requesting.  But such additions aren't easy to
        create.  And often the behaviors of such complex macros
        would be better handled by a command anyway.  In this
        case, given that you haven't given any concrete
        suggestions, you're just distracting from these
        deliberations.
    
 3. Now let's consider from the point of view of other readers on
    this mailing list.  Such a reader has nothing to gain from
    the continual pleas for an API.  Those pleas are just earning
    you ill will, and taking time to skim over by list readers.
    They don't have any concrete suggestions, or any actual
    thwarted use cases.  They aren't solving anyone's problems,
    or making anyone think.
    
 4. To add insult to injury, in this particular case, your answer
    was in fact wrong.  The OP's question was perfectly answered
    by Haris, who noted that the only required action was
    ticking a single checkbox.  So this specific example, if
    anything, proves that an API is not needed, because existing
    structures suffice.

Conclusion: find something more productive to do, like making some useful
language grammars or commands, or else go back to Alpha or emacs or whatever,
where you can get all the API you can eat.  When you have read the manual, and
spent a few weeks or months working with TextMate, and you find something you
can't accomplish, send a note to this list, and we will try to help you.  If
your problem still cannot be solved, and its solution will vastly improve the
productivity of a large number of people, then you will have a more compelling
case to make for the addition of an API.

-Jacob