On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 04:12:54PM -0700, zzk wrote: > Flaming Hakama by Elaine wrote > > Interestingly (perhaps only to me), the only other place I feel like > > I took a step backward in changing editors is that the (in-file) > > find/replace mechanisms in sublime text are clunkier, especially > > since you can't use them macros. > > > > I rather prefer emacs' M-x query replace or M-x replace-string to > > the sublime text approach of multiple selection. > > I agree with your point that emacs' replace capabilities look more > powerful. However, at this stage, it would be an overkill for me, as > I am not a heavy text editor user. > > I guess, it is great that we have so many options today (with a number > of open source apps). [...]
I wasn't sure if this would constitute a meaningful data point, but I do use Lilypond extensively and only ever use vim (without syntax highlighting). For the most part, navigation is no problem for me as I use a very specific formatting, with comment markers indicating different sections of a piece, so even in a full orchestral score it's still usable to keep all the parts in a single file. (Layout specific details like \layout and \paper blocks, macro definitions, and other necessary boilerplate, are kept in different files, though, to minimize distraction from the actual music.) T -- Written on the window of a clothing store: No shirt, no shoes, no service. _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
