On 4 April 2016 at 14:18, Stephan Eggermont <step...@stack.nl> wrote:
> On 04-04-16 11:58, Igor Stasenko wrote: > >> Apart from being 'cool to have', full-fledged word processing is not a >> thing, that you dealing with on a daily basis in environment, like Pharo. >> > I'm sure that is the case for you. I wonder if that is the case for many > Pharo users. > AFAIK there are a lot of pillar users. > > AFAIK there are a lot of car drivers.. does it means Pharo should focus development towards needs of car drivers? :) > For me the problem with the TxText model is that it blocks the possibility > of doing > that later, if and when there is enough development capacity to invest in > this. Why you have such impression? I just said that primary focus was to deliver model that works fine for our current needs. For something more sophisticated simply we had no resources. Take that into account. I had no focus or plans for turning model into full-fledged word processor in future. Right. But i don't see how the model could block such development, if such need would arise at some point. If you have doubts about model, feel free to point it out and we can discuss details. > > Stephan > > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
