From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,195c1254d862280d X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 114c38,195c1254d862280d X-Google-Attributes: gid114c38,public From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) Subject: Re: syntax completion - a bad thing? Date: 1997/02/08 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 217542139 references: <32F91629.5F9@vsl.com.au> <32fa1450.32791176@news.logica.co.uk> organization: New York University newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.os.vxworks Date: 1997-02-08T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Steve said <> Ah, sure, yes the Rational EDITOR does like to molest source as you enter it. A lot of programmers like this and find it useful, and as you point out it is an option you can turn off. Personally I hate editors that do *anything at all* to the text I am entering, I don't even like the Ada mode in EMACS, and I think that editors that produce "useful" templates (like the default mode of EPM on OS/2 editing a C file, or DEC's LSE) are a menace. But this is a place where tastes differ VERY widely, and the important thing is that these kind of features should be configurable in your environment. And indeed using vi seems a quite reassonable "work around".