Updated todo file.
This commit is contained in:
parent
8d76e3fb17
commit
8a077bf4d0
54
todo.md
54
todo.md
|
@ -1,25 +1,14 @@
|
|||
- Clean separation of text buffer from rest of code:
|
||||
//- Create a "BufferFormatter" trait that informs Buffer how its text
|
||||
// should be formatted. Such formatters then determine how the
|
||||
// text buffer graphemes map to a 2d display (e.g. how tabs are handles,
|
||||
// glyph size, spacing, line wrapping, etc.). Buffers then use
|
||||
// BufferFormatters for maintaing information necessary for
|
||||
// 1d <-> 2d operations.
|
||||
- Create BufferFormatters for console and for freetype, including
|
||||
preferences for tab width (specified in spaces) and line wrapping.
|
||||
The freetype formatter should not reference SDL at all, and should
|
||||
have only the freetype library itself as a dependency.
|
||||
//- Handle tab settings properly after the refactor
|
||||
//- Buffer needs a "reformat" method, which can be run after the formatter
|
||||
// is changed in some way (e.g. toggling line wrapping).
|
||||
- Possibly split the text buffer out into its own library...? Would
|
||||
likely be useful to other people as well, and would encourage me to
|
||||
keep the API clean.
|
||||
|
||||
- Undo:
|
||||
- Eventually, with global undo, the undo-stack is going to be project-wide,
|
||||
so don't think too hard about where to put it just yet. For now, just
|
||||
put it somewhere convenient, outside of Buffer.
|
||||
- Syntax highlighting:
|
||||
- It's tempting to want to do syntax highlighting only on the bare
|
||||
minimum parts of the text after an edit, but realistically there
|
||||
are always cases where the entire text has to be scanned again to
|
||||
get correct results. So it must be something that can be done
|
||||
asynchronously.
|
||||
- Maybe a quick-n-dirty local update, followed by an async background
|
||||
update.
|
||||
- Should the syntax highlighting data be stored in the text buffer itself?
|
||||
Or should there be an accompanying structure on the side for that?
|
||||
- What do other editors do?
|
||||
|
||||
- Scripting:
|
||||
- What language to use for scripting? Javascript, Lua, Python, Scheme, ...
|
||||
|
@ -32,27 +21,6 @@
|
|||
rest to scripting. If something ends up being too slow, you can always
|
||||
move it to be hard-coded for performance later.
|
||||
|
||||
- Formatting:
|
||||
- "Formatter" should really just be a factory for producing iterators for
|
||||
lines. Everything else can be inferred from that.
|
||||
- Perhaps take the same approach as emacs, where scrolling is actually
|
||||
a percentage of the way through the data of the document, rather than
|
||||
a literal vertical position. Alternatively, take a more complex approach
|
||||
like gedit/mousepad where the immediately visible text gets updated
|
||||
immediately, but a larger process runs in the background for a while to
|
||||
update the rest of the document. The biggest benefit of the emacs
|
||||
approach is that it's simple and it completely decouples display of the
|
||||
buffer from the text stored in it.
|
||||
- Maybe the biggest lesson here is that regardless of how it's done, it
|
||||
shouldn't actually live inside the buffer. Formatting information needs to be stored outside of the buffer either way.
|
||||
- Start with the emacs approach, and you can always migrate to something
|
||||
more sophisticated later.
|
||||
|
||||
//- Custom line iterator code for file loading, because rust's built-in one
|
||||
// only recognizes LF and CRLF.
|
||||
- File loading is currently very slow. Investigate.
|
||||
- Both Emacs and Vim do line-wrapping extremely efficiently, even for very
|
||||
large files. Investigate how they do this.
|
||||
- Line number display
|
||||
- File opening by entering path
|
||||
- UI that wraps editors, for split view.
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user