Xref: utzoo comp.editors:863 comp.sys.ibm.pc:31278 comp.sys.atari.st:17659 Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!apple!bionet!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!uxc.cso.uiuc.edu!tank!shamash!com50!pwcs!stag!trb From: trb@stag.UUCP ( Todd Burkey ) Newsgroups: comp.editors,comp.sys.ibm.pc,comp.sys.atari.st Subject: Re: Folded release Message-ID: <1989Jul9.164159.3144@stag.UUCP> Date: 9 Jul 89 16:41:59 GMT References: <1989Jul5.150226.24149@stag.UUCP> <218@nikhefh.hep.nl> Reply-To: trb@stag.UUCP ( Todd Burkey ) Organization: Mindtools ST Access Group, Plymouth, MN Lines: 58 In article <218@nikhefh.hep.nl> t68@nikhefh.hep.nl (Jos Vermaseren) writes: >There seems to me something wrong with the idea of storing >fold information in a separate file. Files that are subject to >transport between various machines need to have their `fold file' >transported along. Actually, that isn't always true. One reason I keep fold and relational info in a seperate file is because I don't want thi info transported when I send a file to someone. Folding and relations tend to be a fairly personal thing. I may fold closed all my procedures that I know work and don't need enhancement, while someone else may just wish to fold closed comment blocks. The real reason, though, that FOLDED uses a seperate file is that this method allows you to work with files that you don't want to (or can't) write out to. For example, I tend to fold and/or relate files a lot without making any actual code changes. If I saved the fold or relational information out to the actual file each time, then 'make' would have a field day everytime I rebuilt the executable. Also, it would be impossible to fold or perform relations to files that were owned by someone else (folding actually becomes very useful when you are working with other peoples code). Having seperate files isn't as messy as I had first feared. I used FOLDED in an environment where for 3 months I was editing files at home on my Unix system, uucp'ing them to work during the day and using FOLDED on them on both Sun's and Apollo's, and then uucp'ing them home. As long as you don't do any major line deleting with a foreign editor, you are pretty well set. Also, keep in mind that a majority of programmers out there tend to stay on one machine for most of their programming...and many don't even have PC's at home. >There is a much better scheme for folds available already in an >editor that is commercially available (for 2 years). It exists >currently on the ST and in the fall it will be released for PC's. >The fold information is stored in the file itself in such a way >that the user can make it into commentary for whatever language >that he happens to work in. One other drawback to this method is the the confusing printouts you get (I used this method 3 years ago to implement a simple minded folding capability...and also implemented folding in vi and the Apollo DM editor using the same concept). A more critical drawback, to me, is that pure text files can't be folded when you store the information back into the text file. This was important to me, since I tend to use FOLDED as a thought processor and task planner as well as a source code editor. A thought for future folding techniques might be to allow the integration of folding information into a file to be a user option or possibly based on file extension. The ideal answer might be to someday come up with a better concept of 'files', but the odds on ever changing to an alternate file-system methodology is pretty slim, given the mass of unix, pc-dos, etc pushing the single-file, single-dataset mindset. -Todd Burkey pwcs!stag!trb