[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: idl2matlab translate-o-matic
Mirko Vukovic <email@example.com> writes:
>In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
> "tb" <email@example.com> wrote:
>> "Craig Markwardt" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote in message
>> > Forgive him, he knows not what he says.
>> [Snip good talk on why you need stuff that alot of people
>> always seem to ask, "Why do you need that stuff?"]
>> Dammit! You beat me to it!
>> If IDL wants to be *the* scientific software development leader, then
>> first needs to be a true application development environment.
>AND it needs to use emacs as official editor. (semi seriously but
Well, I'm also a big emacs fan, but I wouldn't go quite that far. However, I
would recommend that one be able to use a user-defined editor. Editors are
always very personal things, and one should be free to use whatever editor one
Personally, I mainly use IDL on Unix workstations, and never use idltool--I
tend to feel it just gets in the way. I certainly would never use the editor
built into idltool except in desperation, even on a PC, simply because I'm so
used to using emacs. :^)
My vote is for allowing a user-defined alternative editor.