Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Github Rolls Out New Text Editor Atom

Unknown Lamer posted about 7 months ago | from the like-emacs-but-...-no-basically-it's-emacs dept.

Programming 82

hypnosec writes "Github has introduced Atom, its new 'web native' code editor which has been in development for more than six years. Atom is available as a part of an invite-only beta program. GitHub describes Atom as an attempt to create an editor 'that will be welcoming to an elementary school student on their first day learning to code, but also a tool they won't outgrow as they develop into seasoned hackers.'" You can request an invite on atom.io. The source to supporting libraries has already been released, but it looks like Atom itself might not be released (although it is a "specialized variant of Chromium designed to be a text editor rather than a web browser."). The editor is extensible in Javascript instead of "special-purpose scripting languages" like Emacs and VIM (is Javascript really any less messy than Emacs-Lisp though?). A preliminary user guide and customization guide are available to all.

cancel ×

82 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

yeah for dumb posts on slashdot (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46363365)

Who cares if it's "less messy" or not? The point is that it's a common, widely understood scripting language, not some obscure bullshit like emac-lisp.

Re:yeah for dumb posts on slashdot (4, Insightful)

master5o1 (1068594) | about 7 months ago | (#46363415)

More importantly, it's common to all those who are the target users of Atom: Web developers.

Re:yeah for dumb posts on slashdot (-1, Troll)

Mister Liberty (769145) | about 7 months ago | (#46364111)

Javascript common to Web developers? That's a laugh! They all know JQuery,
which to me says 'we're all rather incompetent and need another juggler in there to
do the hard work for us".

The truth is: Web development (I do it myself somteimes) isn't real coding.
Sorry.

Re:yeah for dumb posts on slashdot (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46364561)

then what do you consider real coding ?

Re:yeah for dumb posts on slashdot (3, Insightful)

Slashcrunch (626325) | about 7 months ago | (#46365031)

The GP likes to reinvent every wheel that exists before touching the code for the actual app. Some people call that real coding. It isn't very productive though.

Re:yeah for dumb posts on slashdot (1)

Mitchell314 (1576581) | about 7 months ago | (#46371451)

"Ego-stoking", apparently.

Re:yeah for dumb posts on slashdot (2)

exomondo (1725132) | about 7 months ago | (#46365197)

which to me says 'we're all rather incompetent and need another juggler in there to do the hard work for us".

That's just an example of NIH syndrome, do you also re-implement all of your own collections in C++ instead of using the STL or Boost libraries? It isn't about having the hard work done for you, it's about not re-inventing the wheel just for the sake of it.

Re:yeah for dumb posts on slashdot (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46365309)

Sounds like all of CPAN, Ruby gems, and the Python "pear" modules. "I never bothered to learn the industry standard one, so I'll just invent my own, to include some feature everybody else already learned was a bad, bad, bad idea!!!"

Re:yeah for dumb posts on slashdot (1)

exomondo (1725132) | about 6 months ago | (#46383539)

Sounds like all of CPAN, Ruby gems, and the Python "pear" modules. "I never bothered to learn the industry standard one, so I'll just invent my own, to include some feature everybody else already learned was a bad, bad, bad idea!!!"

So what is the "industry standard" for language/framework package management?

Re:yeah for dumb posts on slashdot (0)

davester666 (731373) | about 7 months ago | (#46365363)

spoken like an asshole who uses a c compiler.

Re:yeah for dumb posts on slashdot (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46365931)

Spoken like someone who doesn't even know jQuery and finds lording his ignorance over others preferable to actually learning new things.

(not you; I mean the GP)

Re:yeah for dumb posts on slashdot (2)

markkezner (1209776) | about 7 months ago | (#46367231)

You're not a real coder unless you write your own OS, processor microcode, support libraries, network architecture and programming language before you make your application. Otherwise, you're just letting other people do the hard work for you!

Do see what a bad place this line of thinking takes you? If you want to get anything done, you have to reinvent the world. Imagine if everybody did that... how slow development would be and how slightly incompatible everything would be.

Go ahead and proceed with your elitist worldview. If you need me, I'll be over here, being productive and shipping actual products.

Re:yeah for dumb posts on slashdot (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46363889)

Emacs is moving to Guile as its scripting language.

Re:yeah for dumb posts on slashdot (1)

sandwichbutton (1667763) | about 7 months ago | (#46365219)

Who cares if it's "less messy" or not? The point is that it's a common, widely understood scripting language, not some obscure bullshit like emac-lisp.

Eh, have you ever used emacs-lisp? Don't knock it till ya try it. It's worth the effort, and it's free.

looks like ... (3, Interesting)

danomatika (1977210) | about 7 months ago | (#46363377)

Looks like Sublime Tex [sublimetext.com] t as a web browser. Now when you screw up, you're tab will show a frowny face.

Re:looks like ... (1)

ustolemyname (1301665) | about 7 months ago | (#46363465)

Commenting to fix mis-mod - accidentally modded flamebait, but sublime was the first thing that came to my mind as well.

Off-topic - this was actually the one thing I thought the beta made better, the left/right split of positive/negative mods as well as larger hit boxes, I think it will reduce this kind of error in the future (I mean.... #betasux).

Edit this (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46363393)

frosty piss

Re: Edit this (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46363499)

I concur.

Roll out? (4, Insightful)

hydrofix (1253498) | about 7 months ago | (#46363445)

The editor can not be downloaded anywhere. They don't even tell you what platforms it supports – although someone on Reddit mentioned it only supports Macintosh. I am not signing up to their marketing e-mails before they actually tell me what I am even getting in return.

Re:Roll out? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46363503)

Not just that, but this site only popped up today and isn't mentioned anywhere on GitHub's official site. I'm gonna hold off until I get proof this is legit.

--Nathan2055

Re:Roll out? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46363729)

Github cofounder Tom Preston-Werner (@mojombo) has been tweeting about it and handing out invites; that seems to imply this is legit.

Re:Roll out? (-1, Troll)

sexconker (1179573) | about 7 months ago | (#46363979)

Github cofounder Tom Preston-Werner (@mojombo) has been tweeting about it and handing out invites; that seems to imply this is legit.

Still, it's using a shitty vanity TLD. PASS.

It is cross-platform (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46363519)

It is going to be supported on OS X, Linux, and Windows. It is in beta right now so only the OS X binaries are available.

I'm always amazed that someone will take the time to type in a comment telling us they don't know something and how they didn't use the same amount of time to look for it instead...

Re:It is cross-platform (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46363669)

TFA said it might not be "released" what ever that means. Personally if I can't run it on my machine behind what ever firewalls I want to put in place then I wont use it. If I'm forced to use a webservice just to use an app on the desktop then I don't trust the motivation of the vendors. And no, I don't trust Apple and Google for the same reasons.

Re:It is cross-platform (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46363717)

Where does it say there is only OS X support right now? I can't find the page that you guys are talking about.

--Nathan2055

Re:It is cross-platform (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46364637)

I have seen something like that in the discussion group. I think it was http://discussion.atom.io

Re:Roll out? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46363557)

If it's based on Chromium it should build on all platforms. That, at the moment, it's only available for OS X stands to reason since that's what GitHub developers are rolling internally: "that's what we hack on every day" (http://boxen.github.com/)

Re:Roll out? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46365307)

at the moment, it's only available for OS X stands to reason since that's what GitHub developers are rolling internally

wtf does that even mean? i see that term used so often, also in "roll your own" which i understand but it's just another stupid pointless analogy designed to confuse people. the other idiotic one is "rocking", these are used by people so afraid that what they actually mean sounds too boring.

Re:Roll out? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46369121)

"Rolling your own" is a reference to rolling your own cigarette rather than buying them pre-rolled.

Its not designed to confuse people. If such things confuse you, perhaps youre an aspie, which means you have a handicap. Sucks to be you.

Re:Roll out? (1)

Threni (635302) | about 7 months ago | (#46363751)

Man you do NOT want to be rushing into signing up for emails. That shit's like having kids.

Re:Roll out? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46364399)

It's OSX, Windows, and Linux. The editor will be available as proprietary but shared source. (i.e. in the sense of "you can hack on the core, but you can only legally use it if you buy a license, and we retain all rights to everything" kind of slavery license)

How... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46364979)

I get that it's ~*BeTa*~ but it's been "in development for more than six years" and they don't have any love for Windows or Linux?

Bravo!

Re:Roll out? (1)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about 7 months ago | (#46365081)

"The editor can not be downloaded anywhere. They don't even tell you what platforms it supports â" although someone on Reddit mentioned it only supports Macintosh. I am not signing up to their marketing e-mails before they actually tell me what I am even getting in return."

I got an invite, which took me to a page saying "Download for Mac"... which is not too unusual. But then I didn't find any links to any other OS versions. So, thinking I could only get it for Windows if it auto-detected Windows, I fired up a copy of Windows and went back to the page... which still said Download for Mac.

Maybe Windows version is in the works, I don't know.

It's a pretty nice editor, if a bit rough around the edges. I've been giving it a spin. It reminds me a lot of TextMate. But unlike TextMate, it does split windows.

To me it seems to strike a pretty decent balance, between TextMate's ease-of-use and Sublime's hard-of-use but split window editing ability.

(Not saying Sublime is really hard to use, but it's kind of eccentric in the way it does a lot of things.)

Re:Roll out? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46366185)

Ooh, splitting windows!
I was editing this comment in Emacs, and suddenly my window split and began to laugh.

Regarding the lack of Windows and Linux binaries, it's even sillier than Adobe Brackets not offering a real way to compile sources without Adobe Brackets.

Re:Roll out? (1)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about 7 months ago | (#46369931)

"I was editing this comment in Emacs, and suddenly my window split and began to laugh."

I wasn't saying split windows was anything new or unusual. Just that a couple of the most popular code editors don't have that feature. I have used them before of course and the lack of that feature in an editor is a serious lack indeed.

On the other hand, I've also found that Atom uses an enormous amount of CPU compared to most editors. That's not good.

Atom Versus Brackets (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46363475)

How does this compare to Brackets [brackets.io] ?

Re:Atom Versus Brackets (1)

coolate (1173457) | about 7 months ago | (#46363501)

That was my thought when I saw it!

Re:Atom Versus Brackets (2)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46364423)

You get the privilege of paying GitHub for a proprietary mess whose source code will be just open enough for you to do work for them but not open enough for you to avoid paying for a license or fork the project if GitHub decides to do something evil.

Re:Atom Versus Brackets (2)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about 7 months ago | (#46365129)

"How does this compare to Brackets?"

Brackets is designed for editing HTML, CSS, and JavaScript. And its preview only works with Chrome.

Atom is more of a general-purpose editor. Although the internals of Atom are done with Webkit, and things like syntax highlighting is configured in simple CSS (LESS) files.

Blah. (3, Funny)

DeTech (2589785) | about 7 months ago | (#46363479)

Nano is still a fav of mine.

Re:Blah. (2)

fisted (2295862) | about 7 months ago | (#46364659)

because it is entirely featureless?

Re:Blah. (2)

teh dave (1618221) | about 7 months ago | (#46364745)

Before I was introduced to the wonderful world of *nix, the fact that nano has essentially no features would probably have drawn my criticism in a similar manner.

However, the first text editor I learned to use on Linux has changed my perspective somewhat. We all know which one it is most likely to be. There is one feature it had missing, that nano does have, and I consider it the most important feature of all - it's not completely batshit fucking insane.

Re:Blah. (3, Funny)

Barefoot Monkey (1657313) | about 7 months ago | (#46365945)

However, the first text editor I learned to use on Linux has changed my perspective somewhat. We all know which one it is most likely to be.

ed?

Re:Blah. (1)

fisted (2295862) | about 7 months ago | (#46367995)

There is one feature it had missing

Assuming you're talking about vi, what feature would that be?

Re: Blah. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46372901)

(I'm teh dave, using mobile, cbf logging in)

Like I said, vi is completely batshit fucking insane. After using vi, I consider not being completely batshit fucking insane to be a feature. nano has that feature.

Re:Blah. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46364753)

because it is entirely featureless?

Exactly. A simple text editor with syntax highlighting is all I want, and nano provides just that. Though the syntax highlighting could be a tad better.

Re:Blah. (1)

fisted (2295862) | about 7 months ago | (#46372273)

Fair enough, but then you probably aren't editing much text in the first place, or only some completely irregular/nonrepetitive stuff like writing email.
No, wait, you want syntax highlighing. So you're probably programming.
So why on earth would you possibly want this?

Nano?! (Formerly: Re: Blah.) (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46364775)

Nano? NANO?! Eat flaming death heathen, vim for life!

Re:Nano?! (Formerly: Re: Blah.) (1)

DeTech (2589785) | about 7 months ago | (#46364801)

I hate that over design has become a feature.

Re:Nano?! (Formerly: Re: Blah.) (0)

jones_supa (887896) | about 7 months ago | (#46365591)

Vim is an incredibly crappy text editor. Sure, it makes feel you like a badass UNIX hacker, but it's just silly to jump between the input and command mode, not to mention the various command keys you have to learn and memorize. Aargh!

Re:Nano?! (Formerly: Re: Blah.) (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46369107)

Obviously you've never spent some quality time in vim. Vim provides so many helpful shortcuts for common tasks that I find it extremely difficult to program in just about anything else. Even writing emails is easier in vim. The mode switching is a bit of a stumbling block at first, but it enables the extremely short and efficient editing commands that make vim a must have. There's a reason vim is everywhere. It's because it's a dual wielding Jedi Chuck Norris of an editor.

Just use vi (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46364831)

Used nano when it was pico, and built into pine.

When pico became available as a stand alone editor I quickly discovered that it was worthless for dealing with complex text files like source code. So I went back to vi. It was pretty funny watching CS students try to write code with it. Only to say: use "vi".

Nice... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46363487)

"is Javascript really any less messy than Emacs-Lisp though"

Because we need yet another editor (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46363507)

Seriously? Github thinks their customers are too incompetent to use an IDE? I think that says a lot about the mediocre high schoolers that spam that site with poor quality code. Instead of reducing the quality of their tools, they should instead invest in educating the mouth-breathers that use their site.

I can only read the first two words of your reply. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46363529)

The Beta sucks.

Re:Because we need yet another editor (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46364669)

Windows mouse click "programmer" detected

Modern development: so lacking in control... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46363533)

...that even the source code editor is invite only. This is the future of "cloud"-based design.

No, this is not how I want a new generation to learn to code.

Javascript is the special-purpose scripting language du jour - for active web pages - whereas LISP has many applications.

And it still stands that every new language becomes a re-implementation of LISP.

Stick to what you do well, Github.

Re:Modern development: so lacking in control... (2)

serviscope_minor (664417) | about 7 months ago | (#46366179)

And it still stands that every new language becomes a re-implementation of LISP.

Try saying that to a Haskell programmer: you'll get a well deserved kick in the monads.

ZZzzz (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46363817)

Looks like it's perfect for OS X hipsters who are disrupting entrenched industries by writing rails web cloud apps San Francisco coffee shops. Oops, did I say rails? I meant node.js.

Vim isn't approachable? WTF? Whatever happened to reading the docs? Doing anything useful on Linux isn't really approachable either... maybe that's why Atom looks OS X specific right now.

yate will be buried next to yacc (1)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | about 7 months ago | (#46363999)

A grave site has been reserved for yet another text editor right next to yet another compiler compiler

"Special purpose" (3, Funny)

Volguus Zildrohar (1618657) | about 7 months ago | (#46364337)

On the other end of the spectrum, Emacs and Vim offer extreme flexibility, but they [...] can only be customized with special-purpose scripting languages.

So, what, Python is a special-purpose scripting language now? What special purpose might that be? Pissing off whitespace fanatics? Confounding Javscript programmers with sensible behaviour?

Really? (4, Insightful)

agm (467017) | about 7 months ago | (#46364355)

If using web technologies to build a native application is the answer, then we've asked the wrong question.

Javascript, DOM, CSS etc are a bastardised mish-mash of technologies that lack elegance and coherence; they've come about from the legacy need to display static pages in a browser. To gain functionality more and more features have been added like throwing crap against a wall in the hope something will stick. Using this spaghetti system to drive a text editor makes little sense from a technology point of view.

Re:Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46364539)

No no, dont tell me: you are a Java fan.

Re:Really? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46364581)

Clearly someone who hasn't tried Node yet.

All I ever knew was Java for the last 7-8 years... I took a night to work through the "learnyounode" tutorials.

Complete skepticism about JavaScript as a primary language quickly turned into "why the fuck didn't anyone think of this sooner?"

In short, Node is brilliant.

JavaScript is in fact a brilliant language, which up until Node was shackled inside of a browser, but no more.

Re:Really? (1)

agm (467017) | about 7 months ago | (#46365199)

No, I'm a fan of well structured development toolkits. Don't get me wrong - javascript is fantastic. It's when you add to it the DOM that it becomes a pigs arse.

Good enough for every web application ever, but no (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46364585)

Lack elegance and coherence, and yet somehow are the underlying fabric of the most widely used applications on the planet.

Re:Good enough for every web application ever, but (1)

gbjbaanb (229885) | about 7 months ago | (#46365923)

and your point is what?
Windows is the most widely used OS on the planet and yet... no-one says its the best either. Like the girl who puts out with anyone, you can be really popular yet still rather pathetic.

Re:Really? (1)

Tom (822) | about 7 months ago | (#46366091)

If using web technologies to build a native application is the answer, then we've asked the wrong question.

I agree on that, but...

if you're trying out a new concept, then for the prototype phase, re-using existing technology is a good idea. So using a rendering engine that can display text and colour it and format it instead of writing all that from scratch sounds like a good idea.

If it takes off, I'm fairly sure someone who thinks alike will re-write the lower-level parts.

Yes, webtech is a toy. And that's why it will win. (1)

Qbertino (265505) | about 7 months ago | (#46366163)

Javascript, DOM, CSS etc are a bastardised mish-mash of technologies that lack elegance and coherence; they've come about from the legacy need to display static pages in a browser. To gain functionality more and more features have been added like throwing crap against a wall in the hope something will stick. Using this spaghetti system to drive a text editor makes little sense from a technology point of view.

Web technologies today are a toy. Very true. PHP is a silly mess (Sidenote: ATM I develop PHP/HTML/CSS/JS for a living) and clientside Flash was eons ahead of everything else. That's 'was' as in 'has passed'. Adobe and Macromedia sought to that.

Devs will settle for the lowest common demoninator and will backtrack 2-3 generations of technology if it's open and free. It was the same with the PC. It was a toy. But it was open and free and you could dabble with it without a giant megacorporation sueing you into next wednesday. Now x86 rules the planet, and Amiga and GEOS Works are faint history.

That's the way things go. Nature finds the absurdest ways around obsticles, but it's true.

Re:Yes, webtech is a toy. And that's why it will w (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46366759)

The only semi-serious complain against PHP I've ever heard is that the function names and parameters order aren't uniform. MOTHER. OF. GOD.

Re:Really? (1)

Daniel Hoffmann (2902427) | about 7 months ago | (#46366593)

While I agree with you, the end result of all this mess can be quite good. There are many great web applications that have very good UI, even with the limitations of the DOM and CSS.

In the end this mess produces what the users want. Hopefully soon the specs will add support something else besides the DOM on the browsers so the devs can also get what they want.

Also of note is that Javascript is not such an abysmal language. It has many little annoying things, but it has support for some very cool stuff. The problem lies in using Javascript to manipulate the DOM.

But, but they have a cool animated gif and everyth (2)

debus (751449) | about 7 months ago | (#46364909)

Shouldn't that be enough?

Wait, what? (4, Informative)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | about 7 months ago | (#46364957)

...instead of "special-purpose scripting languages" like Emacs ...

One of the least informed statements I've ever read on /.

Ignoring the fact that Emacs is an editor, not a scripting language, one can do just about anything in LISP (and Emacs LISP), and LISP itself has been around since 1958. I even got paid as a research assistant in college in 1985 to work in LISP on a Xerox 1108 graphical workstation using InterLISP-D (still have the manual). The whole OS was written in LISP and the system had ethernet, mouse and 19" gray-scale monitor. It was fucking awesome.

Re:Wait, what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46365723)

... scripting language, that can be run on bare metal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisp_machine

Re:Wait, what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46365885)

The quoted portion of the sentence was taken directly from the Atom announcement.

Or not so misinformed (2)

Phillip2 (203612) | about 7 months ago | (#46365937)

It's not quite that misinformed. Emacs lisp is a special purpose language. It's implemented in the Emacs core and is not implemented any where else. It's in the same family as the 1958 lisp, but is none-the-less as different language from all the others.

It's actually quite a nice language; it has some nice data types good for editors. And being a lisp, you can layer anything you want on top of it.

Re:Or not so misinformed (1)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | about 7 months ago | (#46368403)

It's not quite that misinformed. Emacs lisp is a special purpose language. ...

Well... It's a version of LISP customized for text-editor use. At its core it's still LISP. [And you're talking to someone who has used Emacs and written Emacs LISP, as well as Common LISP, Franz LISP (and ported the interpreter from BSD to SunOS and Ultrix), and InterLISP-D, since the mid 1980s... So, while certainly not an expert, I have some Emacs and LISP exposure. :-) ]

Still, Microsoft wishes I were dead... (1)

ThatsDrDangerToYou (3480047) | about 7 months ago | (#46367469)

So I'm stuck here in Visual Studio 2012, a nice env for C# (apparently crappy for C++, but whatever..) and the fuckers no longer support emacs key bindings. I could give a shit about Emacs LISP, but give my my key bindings or give me death, or maybe retirement would be nice. Oh yeah, get off my lawn you script kiddies!

Re:Still, Microsoft wishes I were dead... (1)

q4Fry (1322209) | about 7 months ago | (#46368635)

If you tried it, you would notice that Atom doesn't have a language definition for C#.

So, for the moment, at least, Atom is just a "Oh, someone did that. That's nice." I understand I could write or port a language definition, but I am not going to do so just to try out a new pet text editor.

Re:Still, Microsoft wishes I were dead... (1)

ThatsDrDangerToYou (3480047) | about 7 months ago | (#46368763)

If you tried it, you would notice that Atom doesn't have a language definition for C#.

So, for the moment, at least, Atom is just a "Oh, someone did that. That's nice." I understand I could write or port a language definition, but I am not going to do so just to try out a new pet text editor.

No plans to try it. If I'm going outside my IDE, why not just use emacs? .. which I've been using for 30+ years. Cygwin does most of what I need. Yay FOSS.

Adobe Brackets (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46365419)

There's a similar project, Adobe Brackets [brackets.io] , which is code editor for web languages written in HTML/Javascript and using the Chromium runtime with a node process for extensions. It's MIT licensed and has been available for more than a year.

is Javascript really any less messy than Emacs-Lis (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46366041)

No, but when you're coding/scripting for the web with this editor, you probably know how to use javascript (or are learning it)... learning a new language just to extend your editor is a waste of time ....

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>