Emerald Editor Discussion
October 19, 2017, 04:44:38 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
Author Topic: The CE Source Code - The Holy Grail  (Read 22391 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
John Yeung
Senior Miner
***
Posts: 85


« Reply #15 on: December 30, 2006, 01:21:18 am »

I totally agree with Soulfish.  While I am a big fan of Crimson Editor, it has its weaknesses.  And they are real weaknesses, not just bugs (which CE also has).  As I mentioned earlier in this thread, I suspect there are things about Crimson's design which make certain improvements very difficult (which may be why some things took Ingyu so long to develop, or were never developed at all).

So maybe significant chunks of CE code can be incorporated into EE, or maybe not.  In any case, it is still a worthy and admirable goal to create an editor which captures the best aspects of CE while also providing important improvements.

John (not to be confused with Soulfish)
Logged
Derek Parnell
Lead Architect
Miner
**
Posts: 36



« Reply #16 on: December 30, 2006, 09:45:12 am »

WOW! This changes things now. I suspect there is no need for an Emerald project any longer, except maybe to co-ordinate updates to CE. I also suspect that there will be quite a few 'new' editors hitting the street real soon -  many strangely familiar ;-)

I wouldn't write us off quite yet Wink. After all we have slightly different aims to what CE achieves, and while CE is certainly a very very good Text Editor it can certainly be improved upon!
What I said was "except maybe to co-ordinate updates to CE" which meant to imply that we probably do not have to start writing a new application from scratch, instead we can use CE 3.7 as the basis for upgrades to CE. Maybe we have to call it something else ?? I'm not sure.
Logged

--
Derek Parnell
"Down with Mediocrity!"
Feldon
Gem Cutter
****
Posts: 106


« Reply #17 on: December 30, 2006, 07:02:04 pm »

Well-written software is built with a set of design specs.  CE, I'm sure, is no exception.  Early on, critical programming decisions get made based on these design specs.  Then the program expands.  Later, if the specs change, it becomes very hard (if not impossible) to work-around these critical decisions.

Two big design decisions that are completely different for CE and Emerald Editor are the fact that CE was designed for Windows only, and CE was designed without a plug-in system.  I think you'd find it very challenging to change these decisions at this point, especially if you wanted to keep CE lean and efficient.


Also, I'd point out something else.  If you look at the history of a lot of open-source projects, especially one's that have been around for a while, you'll find that they generally started off by forking from, or using the code from some other existing project.  After months of work, they end up with a pretty decent program.  However, they find that if they want a polished, superior product, they need to restart from scratch with their project's unique design goals in mind.  So my suggestion is, why waste time fiddling with CE's code trying to get it to do something it was never designed to do, when we can start from scratch now?
Logged
Derek Parnell
Lead Architect
Miner
**
Posts: 36



« Reply #18 on: December 30, 2006, 09:52:23 pm »

So my suggestion is, why waste time fiddling with CE's code trying to get it to do something it was never designed to do, when we can start from scratch now?
I agree with what you have said and I'm tempted to stick with creating a new editor.

There may need to be two projects as any EE will not be available for some time, but an updated CE could be ready much earlier.
Logged

--
Derek Parnell
"Down with Mediocrity!"
Arantor
Site Administrator
Administrator
Master Jeweller
*****
Posts: 618



« Reply #19 on: December 31, 2006, 12:50:02 am »

I agree: when I started EE, I never envisaged it to be a one-stop replacement (and nothing else) to CE. I always figured that if Mr Kang did ever come back and update CE, EE would be a separate project with some of the same goals, just a common starting point.

I certainly always intended EE to be extensible, it would be CE with plugins to start with, but CE was obviously the best place to start as that was the editor we all used and what kept us in common.

This isn't the end of EE, and shouldn't be taken as such. Even rewriting the Windows-specific bits to use wxWidgets (and thus be nearly- if not completely- platform portable) is a massive amount of work, let alone rewriting the highlighting lexer (which, if I understood correctly, would have to be done to a degree for Scintilla anyhow because it seems to have syntaxes hardwired in, and we wanted a programmable interface)

Long live Emerald Editor!
Logged

"Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult!"
Feldon
Gem Cutter
****
Posts: 106


« Reply #20 on: December 31, 2006, 08:12:45 pm »

There may need to be two projects as any EE will not be available for some time, but an updated CE could be ready much earlier.

I get the feeling there are a number of people over at CE.com that are interested in further developing CE using its source code.  I suspect that a project will emerge at SourceForge or some such site soon enough regardless of what we do here.  And, as you say, thats probably a good thing.  Hopefully we'll see some long awaited updates to CE in the near future.

Oh, and while I could definitely see people working on both projects, I don't think EE should be managing the CE project in any way.  Just call us good neighbours. Smiley
Logged
Arantor
Site Administrator
Administrator
Master Jeweller
*****
Posts: 618



« Reply #21 on: December 31, 2006, 11:39:09 pm »

Seems that someone is recommending us as the 'new keepers' of the CE source. While in theory we could do this, it would undermine our goals to write a CE-a-like editor with new features.

I haven't said anything on the CE forum on the subject, but it seems to me that if anyone does want to take on CE's code, it will massively fork until someone sits down and manages it.

EE will in time (hopefully) succeed CE, but until then, should we attempt to manage its future, or should someone on the CE forum take that banner as the upholder of CE (thus being a totally separate and distinct project to EE)?
Logged

"Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult!"
Derek Parnell
Lead Architect
Miner
**
Posts: 36



« Reply #22 on: January 01, 2007, 01:55:11 am »

should we attempt to manage <CE's> future, or should someone on the CE forum take that banner as the upholder of CE (thus being a totally separate and distinct project to EE)?
Yes, an upgraded CE would be a good idea as it will come to be available sooner than any EE, and yes it should be run as a project so that it is effectively done. But the EE project should not manage it because of many reasons. I would recommend that that there be no EE project involvement in any CE upgrade, though it is resonable to assume that some people might be working on both projects.

I will not be involved in any CE upgrade project though as the EE project will consume all my free time.
Logged

--
Derek Parnell
"Down with Mediocrity!"
Phil
Administrator
Master Jeweller
*****
Posts: 427


« Reply #23 on: January 01, 2007, 06:46:09 pm »

Couldn't we have two modules in SVN, one for EE and one for CE.  The EE guys can work on EE, and the CE guys can work on CE.  Just an idea.

Phil
Logged
Feldon
Gem Cutter
****
Posts: 106


« Reply #24 on: January 01, 2007, 07:01:18 pm »

I think it would be ok for EE.com to open its SVN to CE.  That would encourage people to develop both projects.

However, I'll repeat that the EE team/lead architect/etc should not be responsible for the CE project.

And I'll also repeat that as opposed to what gregmcse has suggested in another thread, and I think a thread in the CE forums, I don't think EE v1.0 should be a re-worked CE 3.70.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.083 seconds with 18 queries.