Hauke, My apologies: I expressed myself awkwardly. No disrespect was meant to any editor. :-). Emacs and vim would be my choices, too, were I feeling a lot more ambitious.
I have the sense that there are two basic approaches under discussion. In the first (the one I think you’re articulating), the editor would change but could (in principle) feed “vanilla” J to the interpreter/debugger. That is, the .ijsx file format could be invisible to the J runtime. In the second (which is what I think I’m hearing from Raul), the interpreter/debugger would be opened up and enhanced to deal with the ijsx format (which would live in .ijs files). An adjunct to the first approach might be a simple front-end translator that the (otherwise unchanged) J runtime could invoke to translate .ijsx to .ijs on load. That would let J deal directly with the enhanced format but would not require opening up the interpreter/debugger. The first approach strikes me as an easier lift with many of the benefits, but my ignorance in all of this is nearly perfect. Ed Sent from my iPad > On Apr 28, 2022, at 10:24 AM, Hauke Rehr <hauke.r...@uni-jena.de> wrote: > > Smarter than emacs? Vim. :) > editor wars aside, I’m having a hard time > imagining any editor smarter than these two > > They may call themselves “smarter” but mostly > that translates to “more cumbersome”. > > folds are natural in any coding editor, > and I guess Tim Pope would come up with a solution > showing the comment associated with the token under > the cursor (if any) in no time; maybe I’ll try and > write some addition to the J file type plugin even > though I’m far from expert at vimscript – > /if/ this syntax should ever be supported. > >> Am 28.04.22 um 09:56 schrieb Ed Gottsman: >> Jan-Pieter, >> I like that file format a lot. Like JSON, it’s human- and machine-readable. >> Further, a “slightly smart” editor (here I’m thinking perhaps of emacs >> macros) could toggle between it (one token per line with comments) and a >> conventional view (all tokens on one line, no comments). A much smarter >> editor might have other, more sophisticated display/edit formats that would >> show both tokens and comments. >> Ed >> Sent from my iPad >>>> On Apr 28, 2022, at 8:49 AM, Jan-Pieter Jacobs >>>> <janpieter.jac...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> I actually was intending for quite a while to propose an extension to >>> comments along the lines of the suggestions in this thread: >>> to use ... as line continuation indicator that turns everything after it up >>> to and including the next line break to be considered comment, and still >>> considers the line to continue (Matlab does this the same, IIRC). It could >>> be thought of as a non-line-breaking version of NB. . >>> >>> For instance (silly example): >>> >>> avg =: ... averag operator >>> +/ ... sum >>> % ... divided by >>> # ... length >>> >>> Now, it's certainly overkill for this tiny example, but I think it could be >>> valuable for longer trains. >>> >>> Advantages of ... : >>> - not in use at the moment >>> - clear meaning (i.e. more code to follow) >>> - fits in with J word formation rules >>> - easy for communication to non-J experts >>> - length the same as NB. >>> >>> Jan-Pieter >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > > -- > ---------------------- > mail written using NEO > neo-layout.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
