[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: KEditcl and KTextEdit
From:       Philippe Fremy <pfremy () chez ! com>
Date:       2001-11-15 13:51:27
[Download RAW message or body]

	Hi,

I am working on vi for KDE and just read this thread (I am not subscribed 
to kde-core-devel).

My goal is to make a vi kpart that implements KTextEditor. So there is no 
doubt that I am concerned by the KTextEditor interface. I just precise this 
because someone thought I was not planning it.

The vi kpart will probably be a kpart running a vim in a QXEmbed widget. 
XPart seemed a bit overkill or too complicated for this. So we will have a 
QVimWidget somewhere.

I don't know if this will be ready for KDE3. 

Could someone explain me what the difference is between KEdit and KEditcl ? 

I think I missed most of the point of the discussion anyway but what you 
must take into account is that we will have a vim implementation of 
KTextEditor sometimes in the near future.

This means that people liking vim will certainly choose this as their 
preferred KTextEditor component. Those people will expect this component to 
be used everywhere where you must edit more than one line. So all use of 
QMultiLineEdit or KEdit should be discouraged in favor of a KTextEditor 
component.

One incentive to do so is to break source compatibility with KEdit, getting 
rid of QMultLineEdit inheritance. Perhaps a bit too strong. But I imagine 
most use of QMultiLineEdit and KEdit are very simple use, basically edit 
that stuff and go. In that case, it shouldn't be hard to move to 
KTextEditor interface.

Rik is also working on a vi-friendly KLineEdit. This would make it possible 
to turn the whole KDE desktop in a vi-friendly desktop :-) Every text and 
every field would be edited with vim (KDevelop, kmail, kate, quanta, 
kaddrbook, ....) : that would rock!

NB: vim doesn't support the doc/view paradigm. I don't know how I can 
implement KTextEditor without doc/view paradigm because I haven't checked 
yet, but I hope this is no problem.

	regards,

	Philippe

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]