On 28 January 2013 19:37, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.duca...@inria.fr> wrote: > This was experimental. Do not lose your time with it. Now you know that you > should continue :) > This was to prove that "kids" could define even texteditor with simple rules. > that 'script' called DSL :)
so, yes.. you can write text editor with 10 lines of DSL code.. + 100+ lines of code for DSL parser + numerous hours for developers to master your DSL before they can understand/change the code :) > Stef > > >> Here is the paper: http://www.vpri.org/pdf/m2010002_lobjects.pdf >> And you can download the image with the actual active essay from >> http://tinlizzie.org/lesserphic2/Text%20Field%20for%20LObject.zip >> >> I read paper and play with image. And I have not good impression about this >> work. >> >> First they present text with real objects for each letter. Each letter is >> actually big object with x, y, predecessor, successor and other attributes. >> How much memory such model required? >> Do you think that presenting any letter with real object (not just >> character) is sufficient for modern computers? I think not. Of course such >> model significantly simplified all logic around text layout stuff. But I >> think it is too expensive. >> >> Another thing which I always not agree is introduction scripting languages >> inside smalltalk. In paper all layout logic (and editing too) programmed by >> "system of rules" in special scripting language (very similar to smalltalk). >> If you look deeply you will see that rules call other rules with same way >> methods call other methods in basic smalltalk code. So I don't see any value >> of rules idea expressed with special scripts. >> In spite of my non positive opinion I like what they do inside rules. It is >> really simple and understandable code. Maybe I will try reuse something. >> >> Best regards, >> Denis > > > > > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
