Ruby Editor

Greetings:

I am new to Ruby (from C++) so these are quite basic questions i’m
afraid.

My questions are also more about Editor mechanics rather than Ruby per
se-if anyone can suggest a better forum, my apologies, just let me
know and i’ll re-post.

I have spent the few weeks with Ruby using irb from the Terminal and
Text Edit, while i got a better sense from the Ruby Community
regarding the editors of choice. So yesterday i bought a license to
TextMate, which by the way, might just be the most beautiful (and t/4
useful) App i have ever seen, let alone owned and used.

My question relates to “commands” (i believe this term has two
meanings in TM-i’m using it to refer to one of the three automation
means). “Scope”?

  1. Can I specify different lexical scopes for different
    “languages” (that might not be the TM lingo-i mean “Ruby,” “HTML,”
    “Text,” etc.)?

  2. If i leave this field empty, is my default, “unlimited scope?”

  3. When i go to the Bundle Editor, i get a drop down of like 20 or so
    languages-3-5 of these i’ll use regularly, another 3-4 ocasionally,
    and the rest, unlikely. I see i can “filter” which i’ve done before in
    other editors, so i know from painful experience that when i’ve had to
    re-add one or more of these, and i do an update, all default bundle
    items write over my customizations. T/4, i would like to put my 3-5
    “everyday set” in a different folder to prevent this. Is there a
    better solution w/ TM?

Thanks,

-alex

On 7/20/07, alex_land removed_email_address@domain.invalid wrote:

  1. Can I specify different lexical scopes for different
    items write over my customizations. T/4, i would like to put my 3-5
    “everyday set” in a different folder to prevent this. Is there a
    better solution w/ TM?

I don’t use TextMate myself, however James Edward G. II who is a
prolific
and helpful contributor to this list has written a book (which I haven’t
read) all about TextMate. It might be worth checking out.

http://www.pragmaticprogrammer.com/titles/textmate/index.html

Thanks,

On Jul 20, 2007, at 6:46 PM, Logan C. wrote:

se-if anyone can suggest a better forum, my apologies, just let me
means). “Scope”?
before in
and helpful contributor to this list has written a book (which I

Mr. Gray not only wrote “the” book on TextMate (available also as a
pdf ebook at the Pragmatic Programmers’ site at a discount versus the
print book) but he also wrote a lot of bundles for TextMate, I believe.
Get the book. Read a little bit of it at a time. Just learn something
new every day or two or ten. As you learn your way around TextMate
you will find your productivity increasing rapidly, particularly with
Ruby, Rails and HTML.
For some languages there may be better solutions available.
PHP, especially big projects, for example is probably best done with
Zend’s IDE.
TextMate also works well with Transmit, Panic software’s nice FTP app.
TextMate’s big weakness is with non-western languages. Japanese for
example. It can display the characters (if they’re in the font you
are using) but things go crazy when you use the Kotoeri input system.
This is why in Japan many Rubyists are using Jedit or something.

John J.

Hi,

Am Samstag, 21. Jul 2007, 07:50:00 +0900 schrieb alex_land:

[…] regarding the editors of choice.

I suppose myself to be the most critical Vim user abroad.
I sure took long to accept Vim as a software to be at least installed.
I deeply recommend to use and getting used to Vim.

Bertram

John J. wrote:

My question relates to “commands” (i believe this term has two
languages-3-5 of these i’ll use regularly, another 3-4 ocasionally,
and helpful contributor to this list has written a book (which I haven’t
Mr. Gray not only wrote “the” book on TextMate (available also as a pdf
TextMate’s big weakness is with non-western languages. Japanese for
example. It can display the characters (if they’re in the font you are
using) but things go crazy when you use the Kotoeri input system. This
is why in Japan many Rubyists are using Jedit or something.

TextMate has a much bigger weakness … it only runs on a Mac. :frowning:

On Jul 20, 2007, at 10:44 PM, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:

afraid.
TextMate, which by the way, might just be the most beautiful

items write over my customizations. T/4, i would like to put my

ebook at the Pragmatic Programmers’ site at a discount versus the
Zend’s IDE.

That’s hardly a weakness. The developer doesn’t want to be bothered
with developing for other systems. If you’ve used Xcode and Inteface
Builder (or NeXTStep before) can you blame him?

But there is a TextMate Bundle compatible Windows app in the works
from another developer who is getting much support from the TextMate
maker!
Much like the long wait for the OS X Ruby one-click-installer (tried
it today, works like a charm),
the Windows crowd will soon have it’s own equivalent… (minus the OS)

But there is a TextMate Bundle compatible Windows app in the works
from another developer who is getting much support from the TextMate
maker!
Much like the long wait for the OS X Ruby one-click-installer (tried
it today, works like a charm),
the Windows crowd will soon have it’s own equivalent… (minus the OS)
That would be E (http://www.e-texteditor.com). I like it, personally,
but it’s far from polished, and there are a few caveats still being
ironed out. For example, to remain compatible with as many TextMate
bundles as it can, it employs the use of Cygwin to supply *nix commands
and such, which can cause a few hiccups here and there if you don’t
generally use Cygwin anyway (which under Windows I can’t do without).

On Sat, Jul 21, 2007 at 01:27:20PM +0900, John J. wrote:

On Jul 20, 2007, at 10:44 PM, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:

TextMate has a much bigger weakness … it only runs on a Mac. :frowning:

That’s hardly a weakness. The developer doesn’t want to be bothered
with developing for other systems. If you’ve used Xcode and Inteface
Builder (or NeXTStep before) can you blame him?

It’s a big enough weakness that I won’t use it for that very reason.
The
way I see it, any requirement to use an OS that I don’t much like is a
weakness of the application in question.

But there is a TextMate Bundle compatible Windows app in the works
from another developer who is getting much support from the TextMate
maker!
Much like the long wait for the OS X Ruby one-click-installer (tried
it today, works like a charm),
the Windows crowd will soon have it’s own equivalent… (minus the OS)

Whee . . . even worse than having to use a Mac.

This is just one man’s opinion, of course.

In message removed_email_address@domain.invalid, Chad P. writes:

It’s a big enough weakness that I won’t use it for that very reason. The
way I see it, any requirement to use an OS that I don’t much like is a
weakness of the application in question.

I generally agree. In some cases, though, I can see the reasons for
making
those tradeoffs. If my choices are to write something elegant,
reliable,
and clean in Ruby, taking a week to do it, or to spend a month mostly
getting
it running in C, I might be better off with Ruby, even though it may
restrict
my choice of targets some.

-s

Bertram S. wrote:

I deeply respect Vim. I am convinced that there is no more elegant way
to do simple or complex manipulation of text/code. However, learning
Dvorak put a damper on my ability to use Vim. Instead, I am learning
Emacs. If Vim is the most elegant editor, Emacs is the most
customizable. That is a strength and a weakness–I probably won’t feel
completely satisfied with the editor until I have put another 30 hours
into writing customizations and scripts for the program.

These two editors have a steep learning curve, if you want to use them
effectively. (Don’t bother trying, otherwise.) I would think that Vim is
a little better for beginners, because it will force you to learn
without being overly difficult. It is too easy to use Emacs without
learning about its advanced features, and that would be a waste.

Welcome to the cult,
Dan

In message removed_email_address@domain.invalid, Dan Z. writes:

I deeply respect Vim. I am convinced that there is no more elegant way
to do simple or complex manipulation of text/code. However, learning
Dvorak put a damper on my ability to use Vim.

I haven’t had a problem with that.

That said, of course, I like nvi better. It’s the only one of the vi
clones in which infinite undo is implemented in a logically sound way.
:slight_smile:

-s

sender: “Dan Z.” date: “Sat, Jul 21, 2007 at 04:04:51PM +0900” <<<EOQ
I deeply respect Vim. I am convinced that there is no more elegant way
to do simple or complex manipulation of text/code. However, learning
Dvorak put a damper on my ability to use Vim. Instead, I am learning
Emacs. If Vim is the most elegant editor, Emacs is the most
customizable. That is a strength and a weakness–I probably won’t feel
completely satisfied with the editor until I have put another 30 hours
into writing customizations and scripts for the program.
Just for the sake of completness (and for those that don’t know vim):
currently there are 1947 vim plugins listed at vim.sf.net and about
1300 tips for customization. You can also extend vim in one of
vimscript, python, ruby, tcl and/or mzscheme… so I really don’t
think Emacs is more customizable than Vim. Those being said, I love
Emacs just as much as Vim, they both rock!

Cheers,
Alex

On 7/21/07, Chad P. removed_email_address@domain.invalid wrote:

way I see it, any requirement to use an OS that I don’t much like is a

Whee . . . even worse than having to use a Mac.

This is just one man’s opinion, of course.

  • 42! (yes ! means what you think it does :wink:

IOW there is no doubt TextMate is a great piece of SW, it is not Open
Source, for some of us this is a big burden.
And for those who think it is not, just imagine there will be no
TextMate around anymore in some future time…

Robert

I have heard emacs got Ruby syntax highlight and snippets

2007/7/21, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky removed_email_address@domain.invalid:

Alexandru E. Ungur wrote:

I must confess that

a. I don’t use most of the extras Vim gives over good old vi, and
b. Hard-core geek that I am, I never learned either Teco or Emacs.

sender: “M. Edward (Ed) Borasky” date: “Sun, Jul 22, 2007 at 02:07:48AM +0900” <<<EOQ
I must confess that

a. I don’t use most of the extras Vim gives over good old vi, and
b. Hard-core geek that I am, I never learned either Teco or Emacs.
Too bad, as it’s pretty cool for editing Erlang :wink:

Cheers,
Alex

=== excerpt from Emacs Erlang mode help page

Erlang mode:
Major mode for editing Erlang source files in Emacs.
It knows about syntax and comment, it can indent code, it is capable
of fontifying the source file, the TAGS commands are aware of Erlang
modules, and the Erlang man pages can be accessed.

Should this module, “erlang.el”, be installed properly, Erlang mode
is activated whenever an Erlang source or header file is loaded into
Emacs. To indicate this, the mode line should contain the word
“Erlang”.

The main feature of Erlang mode is indentation, press TAB and the
current line will be indented correctly.

Comments starting with only one %' are indented to the column stored in the variablecomment-column’. Comments starting with two %':s are indented with the same indentation as code. Comments starting with at least three%’:s are indented to the first column.

However, Erlang mode contains much more, this is a list of the most
useful commands:
TAB - Indent the line.
C-c C-q - Indent current function.
M-; - Create a comment at the end of the line.
M-q - Fill a comment, i.e. wrap lines so that they (hopefully)
will look better.
M-a - Goto the beginning of an Erlang clause.
M-C-a - Ditto for function.
M-e - Goto the end of an Erlang clause.
M-C-e - Ditto for function.
M-h - Mark current Erlang clause.
M-C-h - Ditto for function.
C-c C-z - Start, or switch to, an inferior Erlang shell.
C-c C-k - Compile current file.
C-x ` - Next error.
, - Electric comma.
; - Electric semicolon.

Erlang mode check the name of the file against the module name when
saving, whenever a mismatch occurs Erlang mode offers to modify the
source.

[…]

On Jul 21, 2007, at 11:29 AM, Robert D. wrote:

TextMate

  • 42! (yes ! means what you think it does :wink:
    I just didn’t know it would be called Ruby
    – Kent Beck

Open source is nice sometimes, but it isn’t the most important thing
to everyone.
There’s no need to ignore software because it’s closed source.

Alexandru E. Ungur wrote:

You can also extend vim in one of
vimscript, python, ruby, tcl and/or mzscheme… so I really don’t
think Emacs is more customizable than Vim.

That is precisely why I think Emacs is more customizable than Vim. Elisp
is capable of controlling every aspect of the program, as I understand
it. All plugins are in Elisp, and many of them can play nice together or
extend each other. By running a few lines of elisp, I have even
(accidentally) changed functions that were necessary to save or exit!
(Like I said earlier, extreme customizability is not always an
advantage. But if you like that sort of thing…)

With Vim, you have to delve into vimscript if you want to have complete
control of the editor (or so I’ve read). Further, many plugins are
written (mostly) in ruby, python, vimscript, etc. If you want to modify
a plugin, it will inevitably not be written in a language that you are
comfortable with. (Maybe others have had more luck with Vim plugins than
me.)

Dan

P.s., just my opinions! Not trying to bash anyone’s religion, here!

On Sat, Jul 21, 2007 at 03:54:27PM +0900, Peter S. wrote:

In message removed_email_address@domain.invalid, Chad P. writes:

It’s a big enough weakness that I won’t use it for that very reason. The
way I see it, any requirement to use an OS that I don’t much like is a
weakness of the application in question.

I generally agree. In some cases, though, I can see the reasons for making
those tradeoffs. If my choices are to write something elegant, reliable,
and clean in Ruby, taking a week to do it, or to spend a month mostly getting
it running in C, I might be better off with Ruby, even though it may restrict
my choice of targets some.

I can understand the developer’s desire to develop for the platform he
uses. From his perspective, I’m sure that’s not a weakness of the
software at all. From the perspective of someone else who uses Macs
every time, all the time, I’m sure it doesn’t look like a weakness.

On the other hand, from the perspective of someone who never uses Macs,
rarely uses Macs, or even uses Macs a lot (but not always), it starts
looking like a weakness.

So it goes. . . .

On Sun, Jul 22, 2007 at 06:01:39AM +0900, John J. wrote:

Open source is nice sometimes, but it isn’t the most important thing
to everyone.
There’s no need to ignore software because it’s closed source.

It appeared pretty clear to me that Robert’s point was that, like all
proprietary, closed source software, TextMate may one day disappear from
the market simply on the whim of the copyright holder (or because the
copyright holder “goes out of business”, gets hit by a bus, whatever).
As such, putting all your eggs in the TextMate basket may be kind of a
losing proposition.

There are other reasons to prefer open source over closed source, as
well. All in all, I don’t think TextMate is good enough that it
overcomes the negatives of being a closed source, proprietary
application. There are cases where, in a strictly technical sense, the
benefits of a given piece of software do overcome the detriments, but
for my money this is not one of them. This in no way means that whether
or not something is open source is the only, or even biggest, concern,
but rather that whether it’s open source is simply an important
concern.

Your mileage may vary.