On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 12:06:25AM EDT, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Wed, 27 May 2009 22:34:45 -0400, Chris Jones wrote:
> > I'm unsure about a python editor for everyone but since acquiring > > habits takes time, I'm in favor of sticking to one editor for > > everything. > > Or use an editor which follows user interface standards, rather than > invents its own conventions for everything. That way you can trivially > swap from one compliant application to another compliant application. > > A good UI standard should mean that: > > * common tasks should use the same interface in any application that > supports that task; > > * all functionality should be discoverable without reading the manual; > > * the most common functions should be _trivially_ discoverable; > > * don't penalise the user for mistakes: as few actions as possible > should be irreversible, and those which are irreversible should > _effectively_ warn the user that they are irreversible; > > * simple interfaces are better than complicated interfaces (easy tasks > should be easy to perform); > > * but dumbing-down is not the same as simplifying (complicated tasks > should be possible); > > * if possible, all functionality should be capable of being performed > by either the mouse or keyboard. All valid points on the face of it, but doesn't the above rule out both vim and emacs? CJ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
