Folding: Design Criteria, draft

[Randy Kramer]

Bert,

Thanks very much to you, also, for taking the time to read that document.  
(Some comments below.)

On Wednesday 05 March 2008 04:30 am, Bert Wesarg wrote:
> That was my first impression too. But without a goal what is needed in
> the end, you don't know what to implement internally. Randy has the
> view of a user, 

Thanks for recognizing that.  I wouldn't take that to mean that I'm the final 
answer on usability issues, but I do have thoughts there.

I've never programmed in C or C++, and struggled everytime I've tried to read 
C code.  I have gotten some insights recently in going through the nedit 
code, but it is very slow and painful.   (I finally almost understand that C 
doesn't quite have real arrays, and that's one of the uses for pointers--I 
found (and have noted somewhere) a page that takes that point of view and I 
found it helpful).)

However, if you want to "throw down" in something like Algol, Fortran, or 
Pascal, bring it on (or maybe I should say, if you want to go back in time, 
like on the order of 30 years ago--I don't know if I remember anything 
anymore except how to spell those)  ;-)

> and at least me thinks only in implementation details.  

Certainly, those have to be dealt with. ;-)

> For example, I haven't consider this 'hierarchical' folding thing,
> only 'nested' folding.
> Because I programming most, but for text processing (HTML,LaTeX,wiki)
> this 'hierarchical' folding is of more value.

Hmm, I'm glad I used the word hierarchical then--I'm not exactly sure what 
additional you inferred from that word, but I almost used nested to describe 
it, and I guess we would have lost something. ;-)  

regards,
Randy Kramer