Re: Code patches vs. macros vs. plugins (was: Re: Re[2]: INS)

From: Omer Zak (
Date: Tue Jan 21 2003 - 06:30:34 EST

  • Next message: Kenneth J. Davis: "Re[4]: INS"

    On Tue, 21 Jan 2003, Robert G. Werner wrote:

    > Omer Zak wrote:
    > [snip]
    > > In the case of AbiWord, if this is not already implemented or planned, I
    > > suggest to think about a mechanism for supporting key combinations
    > > rebinding and macros.The scripting language to be used for macros could
    > > be Scheme (Guile) or Python.

    [... snipped ...]

    > Now you want to take on Emacs?I mean, we have a pretty good text
    > editor but where are we going to get the OS stuff ...

    Not exactly. My suggestion is to take this one feature from EMACS.
    For the OS stuff we'll use other mechanisms (such as plugins, already
    supported by AbiWord).

    > BTW,Scheme is interesting. However, I really am hapier in Perl and
    > also,I don't really want to program my word processor (that's what I
    > have Perl for). Just an unsolicited opinion.

    The choice of programming language for writing AbiWord macros is subject
    to discussion. I just made an initial suggestion. Actually, Tcl was
    originally designed exactly for such tasks, but I dislike its syntax and

    About programming one's wordprocessor - if you don't like this, just don't
    program yours. But other people might need the power (especially offices,
    which need to automate procedures for handling documents).

    If the design is done right, then AbiWord will work even if no
    Python/Scheme/*your-favorite-scripting-language* is installed in your PC -
    just it'll not do scripts. So you'd not need to suffer from excess

                                                 --- Omer

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Jan 21 2003 - 06:33:19 EST