Hi All,
Just a couple little usability gnats (beta 6):
1. Cutting and pasting of code pretty much always doubles the indent. Which drives us newbies to drink for a while until we finally discover the indent paste behavior that you can set. Does anyone have this on? Seems like turning it off would make the better default behavior. It would have saved me several days of swearing under my breath each time :)
2. I noticed that the code folding actions are not in the undo stack. Sort of a bummer. I've caught myself trying to undo a fold only to have some change I made previous to that be undone.
Thanks, Phil
Phil Aaronson wrote:
- I noticed that the code folding actions are not in the undo stack.
Sort of a bummer. I've caught myself trying to undo a fold only to have some change I made previous to that be undone.
Why would you want that in the undo stack? If you want to undo the folding, just click again on the fold icon... Folding has nothing to do with the text itself, just the representation of it. On the same note: selecting stuff is also not in the undo stack.
Jeroen.
Why would you want that in the undo stack? You don't have to reach for the mouse, and you don't have to be over the fold icon to unfold it. More importantly its what I (admittedly a newbie, or perhaps more importantly as a newbie) *expected* it to do. Text vs. the representation of text obviously means something to you. The difference is lost on me. If I'm in a word processor and I select some text and make it bold, or change the font, I expect undo to unbold it, or change the font back. Is it really that controversial?
Phil
On Oct 17, 2004, at 9:41 AM, Jeroen wrote:
Phil Aaronson wrote:
- I noticed that the code folding actions are not in the undo stack.
Sort of a bummer. I've caught myself trying to undo a fold only to have some change I made previous to that be undone.
Why would you want that in the undo stack? If you want to undo the folding, just click again on the fold icon... Folding has nothing to do with the text itself, just the representation of it. On the same note: selecting stuff is also not in the undo stack.
Jeroen. _______________________________________________ textmate mailing list textmate@lists.macromates.com http://lists.macromates.com/mailman/listinfo/textmate
Phil Aaronson wrote:
Why would you want that in the undo stack? You don't have to reach for the mouse, and you don't have to be over the fold icon to unfold it.
Well perhaps there should be a hot key for it or something.
More importantly its what I (admittedly a newbie, or perhaps more importantly as a newbie) *expected* it to do. Text vs. the representation of text obviously means something to you. The difference is lost on me. If I'm in a word processor and I select some text and make it bold, or change the font, I expect undo to unbold it, or change the font back. Is it really that controversial?
Yes! TextMate is *not* a word processor, it is a text processor! Everything you do with TextMate results in a file with plain text, where no fonts are defined, no italics, no underline, no folding, just the text. The way things look is simply a result of the workings of TextMate. The result of this is also that you can grab any editor and work on the same file: use TextMate, TextPad, vi(m), emacs, SubEthaEdit, BBEdit, etc.
Jeroen.
On Oct 17, 2004, at 1:08 PM, Jeroen wrote:
Yes! TextMate is *not* a word processor, it is a text processor! Everything you do with TextMate results in a file with plain text, where no fonts are defined, no italics, no underline, no folding, just the text. The way things look is simply a result of the workings of TextMate. The result of this is also that you can grab any editor and work on the same file: use TextMate, TextPad, vi(m), emacs, SubEthaEdit, BBEdit, etc.
Sure, the output is plain text. I'm there. But TextMate doesn't exist in a vacuum. We all use word processors. Take vim (I'm not a BBEdit user which may be adding to my confusion here), if I fold some text in vim, say ':.,.+5 fo' to fold the next 5 lines under the cursor. Undo ('u') undoes the fold. Its what I've been trained to expect.
Phil
Phil Aaronson wrote:
Sure, the output is plain text. I'm there. But TextMate doesn't exist in a vacuum. We all use word processors. Take vim (I'm not a BBEdit user which may be adding to my confusion here), if I fold some text in vim, say ':.,.+5 fo' to fold the next 5 lines under the cursor. Undo ('u') undoes the fold. Its what I've been trained to expect.
You're right, I thought Vim did not put folding on the undo stack, but it does indeed.
However, I still don't think it should be put on the undo stack, simply because it doesn't have anything to do with the text itself.
And word processors != text editors, there's a world of difference between them.
Jeroen.
On Oct 18, 2004, at 12:35 AM, Jeroen wrote:
Phil Aaronson wrote:
Sure, the output is plain text. I'm there. But TextMate doesn't exist in a vacuum. We all use word processors. Take vim (I'm not a BBEdit user which may be adding to my confusion here), if I fold some text in vim, say ':.,.+5 fo' to fold the next 5 lines under the cursor. Undo ('u') undoes the fold. Its what I've been trained to expect.
You're right, I thought Vim did not put folding on the undo stack, but it does indeed.
For the record, in vim, undo also undoes text selection.
However, I still don't think it should be put on the undo stack, simply because it doesn't have anything to do with the text itself.
I'm getting that impression :) Not that this is a big deal, but most apps I use seem to break it down along command vs. setting line, not content vs. representation of content. That said a command vs. setting undo is a little more difficult line to walk with TextMate than a lot of other apps.
And word processors != text editors, there's a world of difference between them.
Fair enough.
Phil
On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 09:35:38 +0200, Jeroen jeroen@je-ju.net wrote:
However, I still don't think it should be put on the undo stack, simply because it doesn't have anything to do with the text itself.
I think what matters here (and what causes confusion) is the definition of "Undo".
Does "Undo" mean "Undo my last action", or "Undo the last change I made to the text"?
Personally, I think the former is more intuitive, but it's not a huge issue for me either way.
-b3
On 17. Oct 2004, at 22:08, Jeroen wrote:
Why would you want that in the undo stack? You don't have to reach for the mouse, and you don't have to be over the fold icon to unfold it.
Well perhaps there should be a hot key for it or something.
You can toggle foldings with F1.
Kind regards Allan
On 17. Oct 2004, at 16:34, Phil Aaronson wrote:
- Cutting and pasting of code pretty much always doubles the indent.
Which drives us newbies to drink for a while until we finally discover the indent paste behavior that you can set. Does anyone have this on?
If it doubles the indent, clearly it's not doing its job correctly ;)
I think there may be some problems if the pasted text uses spaced and the editor is set to use tabs vice versa, but I haven't investigated this fully yet.
If you can give an example of when you get the double indent, please let me know.
Kind regards Allan
-
Allan Odgaard -
Brent Bourgoine -
Jeroen -
Phil Aaronson