Hello all, If you have a chance, it's a fun read and great responses from Allan.
http://nslog.com/2006/11/08/textmates_undo/
In my opinion, Erik is just upset that he did not get a free license from Allan. :)
Hello all, If you have a chance, it's a fun read and great responses from Allan.
http://nslog.com/2006/11/08/textmates_undo/
In my opinion, Erik is just upset that he did not get a free license from Allan. :)
Perhaps he just forgot breathing? Oxygen really works wonders for your brain.
On 10/11/2006, at 8:33 AM, Nicolas Schmidt wrote:
In my opinion, Erik is just upset that he did not get a free license from Allan. :)
Perhaps he just forgot breathing? Oxygen really works wonders for your brain.
This is probably a little strong, and counter productive ... but the fact that Erik doesn't use TextMate makes me like it even more, and not because of that post.
----------------------------- Luke Daley http://www.ldaley.com -----------------------------
On 11/9/06, El Cuco elcucopr@gmail.com wrote:
Hello all, If you have a chance, it's a fun read and great responses from Allan.
http://nslog.com/2006/11/08/textmates_undo/
In my opinion, Erik is just upset that he did not get a free license from Allan. :)
I posted a comment to this thread a few hours ago and he answered that my comment "won't be published in this form", apparently because I posted to links to GoogleFight as a joke at the end.
GoogleFight 1: http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=textmate&word2... GoogleFight 2: http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=Allan+Odgaard&...
This guy doesn't have a big sens of humor. I'm glad I live far away from this gun lover. ;)
I don't really like to be censored, so I posted our discussion on my blog[1]
[1]:http://geekthang.com/2006/11/10/re-textmate-undo
-- FredB
Nice post Fred, I totally agree with you.
On Nov 9, 2006, at 8:39 PM, Fred B wrote:
On 11/9/06, El Cuco elcucopr@gmail.com wrote:
Hello all, If you have a chance, it's a fun read and great responses from Allan.
http://nslog.com/2006/11/08/textmates_undo/
In my opinion, Erik is just upset that he did not get a free license from Allan. :)
I posted a comment to this thread a few hours ago and he answered that my comment "won't be published in this form", apparently because I posted to links to GoogleFight as a joke at the end.
GoogleFight 1: http://www.googlefight.com/index.php? lang=en_GB&word1=textmate&word2=bbedit GoogleFight 2: http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=Allan +Odgaard&word2=Erik+Barzeski
This guy doesn't have a big sens of humor. I'm glad I live far away from this gun lover. ;)
I don't really like to be censored, so I posted our discussion on my blog[1]
-- FredB
For new threads USE THIS: textmate@lists.macromates.com (threading gets destroyed and the universe will collapse if you don't) http://lists.macromates.com/mailman/listinfo/textmate
On 11/10/06, El Cuco elcucopr@gmail.com wrote:
Nice post Fred, I totally agree with you.
Thanks. To be fair, Erik posted on my blog that he over reacted and owes me an apology.
Hi,
On Nov 10, 2006, at 12:39 AM, Fred B wrote:
On 11/9/06, El Cuco elcucopr@gmail.com wrote:
Hello all, If you have a chance, it's a fun read and great responses from Allan.
http://nslog.com/2006/11/08/textmates_undo/
In my opinion, Erik is just upset that he did not get a free license from Allan. :)
I posted a comment to this thread a few hours ago and he answered that my comment "won't be published in this form", apparently because I posted to links to GoogleFight as a joke at the end.
GoogleFight 1: http://www.googlefight.com/index.php? lang=en_GB&word1=textmate&word2=bbedit GoogleFight 2: http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=Allan +Odgaard&word2=Erik+Barzeski
Lot's of people don't like GoogleFight, not because it's meaningless (it's not), but because of the name of the site.
With those people, Google Trends might be more effective, also because you get a bit of history:
http://google.com/trends?q=textmate%2C+bbedit
Best regards, -- Pedro Melo JID: xmpp:melo@simplicidade.org
On 11/10/06, Pedro Melo melo@simplicidade.org wrote:
Lot's of people don't like GoogleFight, not because it's meaningless (it's not), but because of the name of the site.
I can see that, but for me, it was just a joke, really. I guess pagerank is the new street cred.
On 10 Nov 2006, at 12:37, Fred B wrote:
Lot's of people don't like GoogleFight, not because it's meaningless (it's not), but because of the name of the site.
I can see that, but for me, it was just a joke, really. I guess pagerank is the new street cred.
I'd say this is way more telling: http://www.google.com/trends?q=textmate%2C+bbedit
:)
On 10/11/06, Andy Armstrong andy@hexten.net wrote:
On 10 Nov 2006, at 12:37, Fred B wrote:
Lot's of people don't like GoogleFight, not because it's meaningless (it's not), but because of the name of the site.
I can see that, but for me, it was just a joke, really. I guess pagerank is the new street cred.
I'd say this is way more telling: http://www.google.com/trends?q=textmate%2C+bbedit
From the regional section of that chart I'm guessing 'Textmate' is a
Philippino term for porn or something...
Ed
On 10 Nov 2006, at 15:45, Ed Singleton wrote:
From the regional section of that chart I'm guessing 'Textmate' is a
Philippino term for porn or something...
I *think* that this:
Keep in mind that instead of measuring overall interest in a topic, Google Trends shows users' propensity to search for that topic on Google on a relative basis. For example, just because a particular region isn't on the Top Regions list for the term "haircut" doesn't necessarily mean that people there have decided to stage a mass rebellion against society's conventions. It could be that people in that region might not use Google to find a barber, use a different term when doing their searches, or simply search for so many other topics unrelated to haircuts that searches for "haircut" make up a very small portion of the search volume from that region when compared to other regions.
(from http://www.google.com/intl/en/trends/about.html#4)
implies that maybe it wouldn't take a huge absolute number of searches to swing the city / region / language results. Not sure though.
On Nov 10, 2006, at 4:59 AM, Andy Armstrong wrote:
I'd say this is way more telling: http://www.google.com/trends?q=textmate%2C+bbedit
Telling? Yes, but not about the relative popularity of the two products. At least not reliably.
No more so than O'Reilly's book sales numbers (which are also available publicly) are a good indication of language popularity (for example, Ruby saw a 700% increase in book sales in the 12 months prior to about june. Did Ruby grow that much in popularity? No. The Ruby on Rails marketing campaign hit its stride in that period of time and RoR became the hottest "new" technology on the intertubes).
Something like "trends" for a product is often a more accurate indication as to the # of releases or the amount of "news" generated around the product, neither of which have any real indication as to the # of users or licenses. As well, the very nature of TextMate creates a much larger footprint on the internet than BBEdit as a result of the open bundle repository and "online-ness" of the primary user base.
This entire "editor war" is stupid.
Any long time user of a text editor is going to find a different editor implemented with a different philosophy to be painful to use. Just as long term BBEdit users don't find TM to be usable, neither can a long term emacs user find BBEdit to be usable (I tried to use BBEdit. Couldn't do it. Too alien to emacs.).
BBEdit is an amazing product. Experienced users of BBEdit can do things that completely run circles around TextMate. But that is because they are using BBEdit in a highly optimal usage pattern that efficiently uses the BBEdit core.
Same goes for TextMate users. There is an entirely different set of features for which an experienced TM user will blow the doors off a BBEdit user attempting to do the same thing.
The two products are different. At this time, neither is particularly better overall. Both have strengths and weaknesses and both are built such that a truly immersed user in one of the products is going to find the other product completely inferior.
Ultimately, so what?
b.bum
On Nov 10, 2006, at 10:23 AM, Bill Bumgarner wrote:
Ruby saw a 700% increase in book sales in the 12 months prior to about june. Did Ruby grow that much in popularity? No. The Ruby on Rails marketing campaign hit its stride in that period of time and RoR became the hottest "new" technology on the intertubes).
Well, a guy who just got back from RubyConf I can tell you for certain sure that the Ruby scene has exploded.
BBEdit is an amazing product. Experienced users of BBEdit can do things that completely run circles around TextMate.
Hmm, I was a BBEdit user for years and I don't feel this way.
In BBEdit, you can do what Bare Bones gives you as a feature set. Your options for expansion are basically Applescript, Applescript, or Applescript. TextMate is close to that exact opposite of that. Write a quick Ruby, Perl, Python, bash, or whatever your language of choice is script and TextMate gains a new feature.
BBEdit's claim to fame is that it use to be the HTML editor of choice. Ironically, one tiny Ruby command in TextMate's HTML bundle bests the better portion of BBEdit's HTML palette and dialogs. Throw in the rest of the HTML bundle and it's an outright slaughter. Furthermore, where the heck is BBEdit's collection of Markdown and Textile features? For the King of HTML it sure is short sighted.
I literally miss one feature of BBEdit: multi-file search. The BBEdit model is just very powerful compared to Find in Project. I really loved being able to use a search as the target for another search. However, I see no point in complaining about this since I can add a bundle for it at any time.
BBEdit's new indented soft-wrap also looks nice and, to be fair, I cannot add this to TextMate.
This is all just my opinion though. Other's obviously feel differently.
James Edward Gray II
On Nov 10, 2006, at 11:52 AM, James Edward Gray II wrote:
This is all just my opinion though. Other's obviously feel differently.
I, too, was a BBEdit power user for a long stinkin time. I was even starting to try and learn their bizarre language definition stuff to make my own language syntaxes when I switched over to TextMate.
The Rails screencast got me interested in TextMate again. But I totally switched because of Projects and Themes. Not having to use the finder is a major advantage. (Sure, BBEdit has some sort of feature for multiple files now, but it still doesn't make any sense to me)
I really miss the Balance Tags command and the way it handles non- word characters and cursor movement / selections. (stops between html tags, etc...) But I'm in the middle of trying to write my own Balance Tags command, so that shouldn't be a problem for long.
I used to write all kinds of crazy scripts with applescript to make BBEdit do all kinds of crazy stuff. But with Ruby and TextMate, I can do a thousand times better with a billionth of the code.
thomas Aylott — design42 — subtleGradient — CrazyEgg
thomas Aylott wrote:
On Nov 10, 2006, at 11:52 AM, James Edward Gray II wrote:
This is all just my opinion though. Other's obviously feel differently.
I, too, was a BBEdit power user for a long stinkin time. I was even starting to try and learn their bizarre language definition stuff to make my own language syntaxes when I switched over to TextMate.
Uh, is this the BBEdit addict recovery place? I too was a BBEdit power user. Now, the only thing I use BBEdit for is find/replace functionality. In my mind, that's just about the only thing that TextMate loses out on when compared to BBEdit. The multi-file find/replace functionality, the ability to exclude certain files with certain extensions, the ability to save search patterns, many of the Text menu commands that I've yet to find a replacement for in TextMate... TextMate ain't far off but I still switch to BBEdit for complicated searches and for things like sorting lines, processing duplicate lines, and processing lines containing certain patterns. Maybe TextMate already has 'em and I'm just haven't located it?
Charley
On Nov 11, 2006, at 5:24 PM, Charley Tiggs wrote:
things like sorting lines, processing duplicate lines, and processing lines containing certain patterns. Maybe TextMate already has 'em and I'm just haven't located it?
Do you know about the commands in the Text bundle?
Chris
Chris Thomas wrote:
On Nov 11, 2006, at 5:24 PM, Charley Tiggs wrote:
things like sorting lines, processing duplicate lines, and processing lines containing certain patterns. Maybe TextMate already has 'em and I'm just haven't located it?
Do you know about the commands in the Text bundle?
I do now! Wow...
First time I got TextMate, there were so many languages/bundles that I went in and filtered out all of the ones I didn't think I'd need. The text bundle was one of them. Just didn't expect that what I'd consider basic functionality in a power text editor to be in a bundle. But I freely admit that I have a limited understanding of what bundles are but I'm slowly learning!
Charley
On Nov 11, 2006, at 4:24 PM, Charley Tiggs wrote:
TextMate ain't far off but I still switch to BBEdit for complicated searches and for things like sorting lines,
Bundles -> Text -> Sorting
processing duplicate lines,
1. Select the lines 2. Call up Filter Through Command... 3. Set input to Selection and output to Replace Selection 4. Enter a command of: uniq 5. Push Execute
and processing lines containing certain patterns.
Regular expressions are your friend. ;)
James Edward Gray II
James Edward Gray II wrote:
TextMate ain't far off but I still switch to BBEdit for complicated searches and for things like sorting lines,
Bundles -> Text -> Sorting
Hurm... This is better than BBEdit!
processing duplicate lines,
- Select the lines
- Call up Filter Through Command...
- Set input to Selection and output to Replace Selection
- Enter a command of: uniq
- Push Execute
Might have to make a macro or applescript out of this...
and processing lines containing certain patterns.
Regular expressions are your friend. ;)
Yes, they are but, in this case, BBEdit is better. I can send the matches to a new document and delete 'em from the original document at the same time. This is useful for when I'm needing to quickly weed out multiple sets of data and put each set into separate files for easier processing by other apps/scripts.
Charley
On 12. Nov 2006, at 07:06, Charley Tiggs wrote:
and processing lines containing certain patterns.
Regular expressions are your friend. ;)
Yes, they are but, in this case, BBEdit is better. I can send the matches to a new document and delete 'em from the original document at the same time. This is useful for when I'm needing to quickly weed out multiple sets of data and put each set into separate files for easier processing by other apps/scripts.
You can also use the Filter Lines Through… set Input to Document, output to New Document, and then let the command be either: egrep «regexp» or egrep -v «regexp». The first one creates a new document with all matches from the old one, the latter takes all the lines which did not match the regexp.
We could make two standard commands for this, which prompted the user for the pattern…
As for your other reply:
Just didn't expect that what I'd consider basic functionality in a power text editor to be in a bundle
The idea with TextMate is that as much as possible should be in the bundles, because only in the bundles can users truly modify things, and if we can make all the “basic functionality” as bundle items, then we can make a lot as bundle items, for example those commands you are missing :)
Allan Odgaard wrote:
and processing lines containing certain patterns.
Regular expressions are your friend. ;)
Yes, they are but, in this case, BBEdit is better. I can send the matches to a new document and delete 'em from the original document at the same time. This is useful for when I'm needing to quickly weed out multiple sets of data and put each set into separate files for easier processing by other apps/scripts.
You can also use the Filter Lines Through… set Input to Document, output to New Document, and then let the command be either: egrep «regexp» or egrep -v «regexp». The first one creates a new document with all matches from the old one, the latter takes all the lines which did not match the regexp.
Awesome!
We could make two standard commands for this, which prompted the user for the pattern…
This would be great. Especially for people like me coming from another powerful text editor. Like I said, I revert back to BBEdit only when I can't locate a feature I need and I know that BBEdit has one command and a two step process to accomplish it.
As for your other reply:
Just didn't expect that what I'd consider basic functionality in a power text editor to be in a bundle
The idea with TextMate is that as much as possible should be in the bundles, because only in the bundles can users truly modify things, and if we can make all the “basic functionality” as bundle items, then we can make a lot as bundle items, for example those commands you are missing :)
I'm starting to learn that. It's just taking me some time and repetition to get used to thinking that way. It's a whole new way of thinking about editors that is taking me some time to get used to! But I'm starting to like the flexibility and power as I understand it more.
Charley
On Nov 12, 2006, at 1:06 AM, Charley Tiggs wrote:
Yes, they are but, in this case, BBEdit is better. I can send the matches to a new document and delete 'em from the original document at the same time. This is useful for when I'm needing to quickly weed out multiple sets of data and put each set into separate files for easier processing by other apps/scripts.
Something like this?
j.
Improved version. Renamed it to "Distill Text," checks to make sure it can find mate, ensures pattern can be compiled.
I don't like that mate creates a temporary document under /tmp. TM Gurus, is there a way to have TextMate create a new document with specified text that's a little cleaner? I tried "make new document" via Applescript but didn't have any success. Ideally the new document shouldn't have any backing store until the user tries to close or save it at which point they're prompted for where to save the new file. (Aside, it would be nice if mate had that option...)
j.
On 12. Nov 2006, at 08:20, Jay Soffian wrote:
I don't like that mate creates a temporary document under /tmp. TM Gurus, is there a way to have TextMate create a new document with specified text that's a little cleaner? [...]
No, but this is just a current implementation detail, it will change in the future (i.e. the behavior of mate w/o a filename).
As for having mate installed, it is always accessible as $TM_SUPPORT_PATH/bin/mate.
On Nov 12, 2006, at 3:57 AM, Allan Odgaard wrote:
As for having mate installed, it is always accessible as $TM_SUPPORT_PATH/bin/mate.
Okay, attached version of "Distill Text" uses $TM_SUPPORT_PATH/bin/ mate. Also attached two other commands:
- Filter Matching Lines into New Document - Filter Non-Matching Lines into New Document
If I don't hear any objections, I'll add these to the Text bundle. Is that okay?
j.
On 12. Nov 2006, at 18:25, Jay Soffian wrote:
As for having mate installed, it is always accessible as $TM_SUPPORT_PATH/bin/mate.
Okay, attached version of "Distill Text" uses $TM_SUPPORT_PATH/bin/ mate. Also attached two other commands:
- Filter Matching Lines into New Document
- Filter Non-Matching Lines into New Document
If I don't hear any objections, I'll add these to the Text bundle. Is that okay?
Instead of the Python stuff, you can do:
egrep "$(tail -n1 <<<"$res")" || exit_show_tool_tip
And for the non-matching version:
egrep -v "$(tail -n1 <<<"$res")" || exit_show_tool_tip
On Nov 12, 2006, at 12:44 PM, Allan Odgaard wrote:
Instead of the Python stuff, you can do:
Python's regex engine takes patterns a more like oniguruma than egrep's extended REs. Principle of least surprise. :-)
j.
Jay Soffian wrote:
Improved version. Renamed it to "Distill Text," checks to make sure it can find mate, ensures pattern can be compiled.
Oy! I've been lurking on this list for the better part of 2 months and have slowly been ramping up on TextMate. I continue to be astonished with how quickly solutions are posted to things people are missing from other text editors and the ongoing development that users and Allan do to make TextMate ever more powerful. I think it's time I got the beta book and start working my way through it.
Thanks, Jay and Allan, for helping me discover the last piece that I needed to make TextMate my primary editor.
Onward and upward!
Charley
On 12/11/2006, at 5:20 PM, Jay Soffian wrote:
TM Gurus, is there a way to have TextMate create a new document with specified text that's a little cleaner? I tried "make new document" via Applescript but didn't have any success.
A Guru I am not, but Allan gave this to me a few days ago.
osascript -e 'tell app "TextMate" to activate' -e 'tell app "System Events" to keystroke "n" using command down'
Works great. As for add the text, I don't know.
----------------------------- Luke Daley http://www.ldaley.com -----------------------------
On Nov 12, 2006, at 6:30 PM, Luke Daley wrote:
A Guru I am not, but Allan gave this to me a few days ago.
osascript -e 'tell app "TextMate" to activate' -e 'tell app "System Events" to keystroke "n" using command down'
Works great. As for add the text, I don't know.
Cool. New version attached. Instead of piping to mate, I pipe to pbcopy, then just do a cmd-n, cmd-v via system events.
j.
On Nov 10, 2006, at 4:59 AM, Andy Armstrong wrote:
I'd say this is way more telling: http://www.google.com/trends?q=textmate%2C+bbedit
Telling? Yes, but not about the relative popularity of the two products.
No more so than O'Reilly's book sales numbers (which are also available publicly) are a good indication of language popularity.
Something like "trends" for a product is often a more accurate indication as to the # of releases or the amount of "news" generated around the product, neither of which have any real indication as to the # of users or licenses. As well, the very nature of TextMate creates a much larger footprint on the internet than BBEdit as a result of the open bundle repository and "online-ness" of the primary user base.
This entire "editor war" is stupid.
Any long time user of a text editor is going to find a different editor implemented with a different philosophy to be painful to use. Just as long term BBEdit users don't find TM to be usable, neither can a long term emacs user find BBEdit to be usable (I tried to use BBEdit. Couldn't do it. Too alien to emacs.).
BBEdit is an amazing product. Experienced users of BBEdit can do things that completely run circles around TextMate. But that is because they are using BBEdit in a highly optimal usage pattern that efficiently uses the BBEdit core.
Same goes for TextMate users. There is an entirely different set of features for which an experienced TM user will blow the doors off a BBEdit user attempting to do the same thing.
The two products are different. At this time, neither is particularly better overall. Both have strengths and weaknesses and both are built such that a truly immersed user in one of the products is going to find the other product completely inferior.
Ultimately, so what?
b.bum
On 11/9/06, El Cuco elcucopr@gmail.com wrote:
Hello all, If you have a chance, it's a fun read and great responses from Allan.
http://nslog.com/2006/11/08/textmates_undo/
In my opinion, Erik is just upset that he did not get a free license from Allan. :)
remember when john c dvorak admitted to baiting mac users to drive site traffic[1]? i am not suggesting that was the motive here (although you are free to speculate) but just that it is a surprisingly effective technique - apparently so much so in erik's case, that his site is down :0)
[1] http://www.scripting.com/2006/06/09.html#When:10:38:44PM
On 11/9/06 2:11 PM, in article FB8D4280-6F35-4990-8295-2E3AFAD29ECF@gmail.com, "El Cuco" elcucopr@gmail.com wrote:
Hello all, If you have a chance, it's a fun read and great responses from Allan.
Okay, but why *does* TextMate's Undo behave this way? It's a hassle for me too. m.
On 10. Nov 2006, at 16:51, Matt Neuburg wrote:
Okay, but why *does* TextMate's Undo behave this way? It's a hassle for me
For me the step-by-step undo is 100% predictable, and that makes me more efficient; I know that if I did an error 3 steps ago, I need to press ⌘Z 3 times, and make the correct steps after that.
Chunked undo screws up my workflow because I have to look and take notice at how much ⌘Z removed, and then “plan” the next appropriate step in my mind, meaning I can’t be mentally ahead of my editor, I need to re-calibrate, so to speak.
Of course it doesn’t help that I have basically always used editors with step-by-step undo, and I had a really hard time adapting to NSTextView’s chunked undo, because it seemed to skip the intermediate steps that I actually wanted to get to, when I used undo.
But I have acknowledged that the majority of users really want chunked undo, and it is the standard on the Mac -- when I don’t jump right on it, it’s because there’s really a lot of things I should also jump on then. But speaking to users at WWDC did make me consider strongly to move it forward from the 2.0 release, seeing how it was basically the only thing people mentioned, and it was mentioned a lot from users who was otherwise quite fanatic about the program.
On 10 Nov 2006, at 16:30, Allan Odgaard wrote:
But I have acknowledged that the majority of users really want chunked undo, and it is the standard on the Mac -- when I don’t jump right on it, it’s because there’s really a lot of things I should also jump on then. But speaking to users at WWDC did make me consider strongly to move it forward from the 2.0 release, seeing how it was basically the only thing people mentioned, and it was mentioned a lot from users who was otherwise quite fanatic about the program.
It'll still be possible to turn off chunked undo, right? I like it how it is :)
On Nov 10, 2006, at 11:38 AM, Andy Armstrong wrote:
On 10 Nov 2006, at 16:30, Allan Odgaard wrote:
But I have acknowledged that the majority of users really want chunked undo, and it is the standard on the Mac -- when I don’t jump right on it, it’s because there’s really a lot of things I should also jump on then. But speaking to users at WWDC did make me consider strongly to move it forward from the 2.0 release, seeing how it was basically the only thing people mentioned, and it was mentioned a lot from users who was otherwise quite fanatic about the program.
It'll still be possible to turn off chunked undo, right? I like it how it is :)
-- Andy Armstrong, hexten.net
I concur. After I finally got used to this style of undo, I greatly prefer it (in my code editor). This looks like on of the few times when a user preference would make sense.
thomas Aylott — design42 — subtleGradient — CrazyEgg
On Nov 10, 2006, at 11:38 AM, Andy Armstrong wrote:
On 10 Nov 2006, at 16:30, Allan Odgaard wrote:
But I have acknowledged that the majority of users really want chunked undo, and it is the standard on the Mac -- when I don’t jump right on it, it’s because there’s really a lot of things I should also jump on then. But speaking to users at WWDC did make me consider strongly to move it forward from the 2.0 release, seeing how it was basically the only thing people mentioned, and it was mentioned a lot from users who was otherwise quite fanatic about the program.
It'll still be possible to turn off chunked undo, right? I like it how it is :)
-- Andy Armstrong, hexten.net
I concur. After I finally got used to this style of undo, I greatly prefer it (in my code editor). This looks like on of the few times when a user preference would make sense.
thomas Aylott — design42 — subtleGradient — CrazyEgg
I find that when I am writing Latex code I need step by step undo, but when writing about ideas chunk undo would be much more natural. It would be cool to be able to toggle back and forth. The potential mountain of users of TM would feel the same.
Jenny
I would strongly prefer to have both at my disposal all the time.
In many cases I find the non-chunked undo acceptable or even preferable, but sometime I want to roll back a few hundred characters (or about 10 chunks :D).
So my vote is for adding the Option modifier for chunk undo (Cmd+Opt +Z/Cmd+Opt+Shift+Z). And probably some way to specify the desired default (chunked or textmate).
Corey
On Nov 10, 2006, at 8:57 AM, thomas Aylott wrote:
On Nov 10, 2006, at 11:38 AM, Andy Armstrong wrote:
On 10 Nov 2006, at 16:30, Allan Odgaard wrote:
But I have acknowledged that the majority of users really want chunked undo, and it is the standard on the Mac -- when I don’t jump right on it, it’s because there’s really a lot of things I should also jump on then. But speaking to users at WWDC did make me consider strongly to move it forward from the 2.0 release, seeing how it was basically the only thing people mentioned, and it was mentioned a lot from users who was otherwise quite fanatic about the program.
It'll still be possible to turn off chunked undo, right? I like it how it is :)
-- Andy Armstrong, hexten.net
I concur. After I finally got used to this style of undo, I greatly prefer it (in my code editor). This looks like on of the few times when a user preference would make sense.
thomas Aylott — design42 — subtleGradient — CrazyEgg
For new threads USE THIS: textmate@lists.macromates.com (threading gets destroyed and the universe will collapse if you don't) http://lists.macromates.com/mailman/listinfo/textmate
On Fri, 10 Nov 2006, Allan Odgaard wrote:
But I have acknowledged that the majority of users really want chunked undo, and it is the standard on the Mac
I still think the best option is the vim-like style of being able to specify the number of times you want the next action to occur. Of course way back when I first whined about this you had to go on and bring up some logical reasons why that model doesn't really work with TextMate, grumble, grumble...
I don't suppose you've been able to overcome that accursed well-reasoned argument since then, have you?
William D. Neuman
---
"There's just so many extra children, we could just feed the children to these tigers. We don't need them, we're not doing anything with them.
Tigers are noble and sleek; children are loud and messy."
-- Neko Case
Life is unfair. Kill yourself or get over it. -- Black Box Recorder
Sent this a while ago, but used the wrong address so it bounced…
On Nov 10, 2006, at 11:30 AM, Allan Odgaard wrote:
On 10. Nov 2006, at 16:51, Matt Neuburg wrote:
Okay, but why *does* TextMate's Undo behave this way? It's a hassle for me
For me the step-by-step undo is 100% predictable, and that makes me more efficient; I know that if I did an error 3 steps ago, I need to press ⌘Z 3 times, and make the correct steps after that.
Consider this another vote for keeping the current behavior (at least as an option).
I would love chunked undo if it knew what I "meant to do", but there's no way in hell it can know that. If Allan could write software that read your mind, he would have been abducted by some government by now. :)
In my experience, when software tries to "help" you by making assumptions, it just gets in the way and annoys you. I'd rather have something tedious and predictable than something quick that makes me say "Whoa! Where the hell am I?" That's editing text the "Max Power way".
### From The Simpsons Homer (who had changed his name to "Max Power"): There are three ways to do things. The right way, the wrong way, and the Max Power way! Bart: Isn't that the wrong way? Homer: Yeah… but faster.
On 14/11/06, Rob McBroom textmate@skurfer.com wrote:
Sent this a while ago, but used the wrong address so it bounced…
On Nov 10, 2006, at 11:30 AM, Allan Odgaard wrote:
On 10. Nov 2006, at 16:51, Matt Neuburg wrote:
Okay, but why *does* TextMate's Undo behave this way? It's a hassle for me
For me the step-by-step undo is 100% predictable, and that makes me more efficient; I know that if I did an error 3 steps ago, I need to press ⌘Z 3 times, and make the correct steps after that.
Consider this another vote for keeping the current behavior (at least as an option).
I would love chunked undo if it knew what I "meant to do", but there's no way in hell it can know that. If Allan could write software that read your mind, he would have been abducted by some government by now. :)
In my experience, when software tries to "help" you by making assumptions, it just gets in the way and annoys you. I'd rather have something tedious and predictable than something quick that makes me say "Whoa! Where the hell am I?" That's editing text the "Max Power way".
I'd like to give vote for a third option.
Eclipse has a wonderful feature where the editor constantly does a diff with your current document and the last saved version. It shows the diff colours in the margin. You can easily revert just the line you are one (or a bunch of lines) to the last saved version.
A revert selection to last saved version command would be amazing (and probably could be done with a plugin).
Ed
For a web dude who's constantly updating some thing here and there and previewing in browsers, the document gets saved a lot so this wouldn't be all that useful, though I can really see the advantages when coding "normally".
Andreas
On Nov 15, 2006, at 14:56 , Allan Odgaard wrote:
On 15. Nov 2006, at 10:04, Ed Singleton wrote:
[...] A revert selection to last saved version command would be amazing (and probably could be done with a plugin).
It would indeed be possible to do as a command, and sounds somewhat useful :)
For new threads USE THIS: textmate@lists.macromates.com (threading gets destroyed and the universe will collapse if you don't) http://lists.macromates.com/mailman/listinfo/textmate
On Nov 15, 2006, at 8:56 AM, Allan Odgaard wrote:
On 15. Nov 2006, at 10:04, Ed Singleton wrote:
[...] A revert selection to last saved version command would be amazing (and probably could be done with a plugin).
It would indeed be possible to do as a command, and sounds somewhat useful :)
Ok, that would be pretty stinking nifty. Especially showing the diff status inline somehow.
thomas Aylott — design42 — subtleGradient — CrazyEgg
In article 6D2C3ED7-C6D3-4910-A124-DF57991176CB@macromates.com, Allan Odgaard throw-away-1@macromates.com wrote:
On 10. Nov 2006, at 16:51, Matt Neuburg wrote:
Okay, but why *does* TextMate's Undo behave this way? It's a hassle for me
For me the step-by-step undo is 100% predictable, and that makes me more efficient; I know that if I did an error 3 steps ago, I need to press ?Z 3 times, and make the correct steps after that.
Chunked undo screws up my workflow because I have to look and take notice at how much ?Z removed, and then “plan” the next appropriate step in my mind, meaning I can’t be mentally ahead of my editor, I need to re-calibrate, so to speak.
Of course it doesn’t help that I have basically always used editors with step-by-step undo, and I had a really hard time adapting to NSTextView’s chunked undo, because it seemed to skip the intermediate steps that I actually wanted to get to, when I used undo.
But I have acknowledged that the majority of users really want chunked undo, and it is the standard on the Mac -- when I don’t jump right on it, it’s because there’s really a lot of things I should also jump on then. But speaking to users at WWDC did make me consider strongly to move it forward from the 2.0 release, seeing how it was basically the only thing people mentioned, and it was mentioned a lot from users who was otherwise quite fanatic about the program.
Thank you!! That is great news!! I'm glad it's planned for 2.0 and would be thrilled to see it come out before then. It is the one thing that has kept me from switching to TextMate.
-- Russell
-
Allan Odgaard -
Andreas Wahlin -
Andy Armstrong -
Bill Bumgarner -
Charley Tiggs -
Chris Thomas -
Corey Jewett -
Ed Singleton -
El Cuco -
Fred B -
James Edward Gray II -
Jay Soffian -
jeanpierre＠gmail.com -
Jenny Harrison -
Luke Daley -
Matt Neuburg -
Nicolas Schmidt -
Pedro Melo -
Rob McBroom -
Russell E Owen -
thomas Aylott -
William D. Neumann