faq
flatforty
contribute
subscribe
configure
search
rdf
main
parent
thread
|
Re: Model KWrite after GEdit, keep Kate for geeks
by Morty on Friday 18/Apr/2008, @00:18
|
>So what are these reasons?
There are several, like working on single file programs you don't need the multiple file capabilities or sessons of Kate and it's preferable to not mix it with other projects. While working on big projects, where you work on one or more singel file, located in different part of the project. When doing system administrator task, remote or local, you usually work on single files, there are no need for Kates multiple file interface. When cecking out source code unrelated to your project to get a tip/idea how to solv a problem, or checking up on a header file.
>I think that if Kate doesn't work for a programmer
Kate works very well for programmers, but there are times where you even as a programmer don't need Kate's functionality and KWrite simply are a better tool for the job.
>KWrite should cover only *basic* text editing *without* niche functionality like progamming.
Why? Since you can't provide one single valid use case where the programming functionality in KWrite is a hindrance when using it as a basic text editor, you gain nothing by it.
>KWrite in kdebase should have no niche programming functionality.
Why do you keep insisting that, it's pure nonsens. Its already established that this functionality does not affects KWrite's abillity as a simple editor for non programmers. Is it some kind of fetish you have, that the tool you use for pure text should not be usable for programming by others? |
|
|
The Fine Print: The following comments
are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
Re: Model KWrite after GEdit, keep Kate for geeks
by Tray on Friday 18/Apr/2008, @13:37
|
> you don't need the multiple file capabilities or sessons of Kate
How IRONIC! You can't be bothered to use the "default" session in Kate because the the ability to have multiple sessions gets in your way, and you complain about "multiple file capabilities". And yet you want to stuff your favorite esoteric coding style options and configurations on non-techy users of KWrite for whom those options are completely irrelevant. Because obviously your programming fluff won't bother them, and even if it does those users don't matter anyway.
> you usually work on single files, there are no need for Kates
> multiple file interface.
You can very easily make Kate work on a single file by closing the file lister on the left side. After that it's as if you only have one file open.
> Since you can't provide one single valid use case where the
> programming functionality in KWrite is a hindrance
Sure I can: Geekish programming options are tiresome, confusing, and intimidating for non-programmers and get in the way of their doing simple stuff like spell checking, copy/pasting and printing.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Model KWrite after GEdit, keep Kate for geeks
by Morty on Tuesday 22/Apr/2008, @14:45
|
>esoteric coding style options and configurations on non-techy users of KWrite
>for whom those options are completely irrelevant. Because obviously your
>programming fluff won't bother them,
Exactly, those options you for some irrational reason hate so much, are in the singel digit percentage of menu options. So yes, they are so few they will not bother the non-techy users. But it's features that have valid user cases and are indeed used by many existing users. And caused by of some kind of personal, and not founded in reality usability theory, you want to remove features used by many existing users. Removing a tool used by many to solve a non-existing problem, since those users don't matter anyway.
>You can very easily make Kate work
So rather than having a simple tool best fitted to the task, you need to preform extra actions to make a more complex tool less so. Thats irony.
>Geekish programming options are tiresome, confusing, and intimidating for non-programmers
>and get in the way of their doing simple stuff like spell checking, copy/pasting and printing.
This is not even a user case, only theoretical musings. And its even less valid, since it's not applicable to the reality of this case. Since KWrites programming options are so few compared to the non geekish options, they will not get in the way or intimidate the non-programmers doing simple stuff. Of the non-programming users more than 99.99% will simply just ignore the few options they don't have a need for or don't understand.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
|
The Fine Print: The previous
comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
|
![[KDE Dot News]](http://www.kde.org/dot/Images/kdedotnews.gif)
