Re: Pete Lomax M Editor vs Edita
Pete Lomax wrote:
>
> On Sat, 03 Jun 2006 17:42:28 -0700, Serge Lavigne
> <guest at RapidEuphoria.com> wrote:
>
> >posted by: Serge Lavigne <lavigne.s at videotron.ca>
> >
> >Greg Haberek wrote:
> >>
> >> > What are the main differences between these 2 editors?
> >>
> >> Edita is being actively developed. MEditor is not.
> Correct
>
> >I Know that. I used M Edidor in the past. What I I'd like to know is why Pete
> stopped developping </font></i>
> >M Editor and started a new editor from scratch. Is Edita More modern, more
> capable, more advance etc? in What ways?</font></i>
> I inherited MEditor, which uses win32lib. There were many things I
> really didn't fully understand (esp scrollbars and pixmaps) and in the
> end I found myself fighting with the complex innards of win32lib.
> Whilst MEditor was quite popular, several people complained about the
> performance, and using a low-end machine myself, I had to agree.
>
> So I looked at a few alternatives and found Arwen. At first, it was
> just supposed to be a quick experiment, but three weeks later I had a
> basically working editor that was blindingly fast. I was smitten.
> Internally, it was *so* much simpler [than win32lib], so much so that
> I ended up adding support for listviews and treeviews myself, without
> /that/ much trouble.
>
> Maybe it is simply that one of win32lib's intentions is to hide the
> windows API, and maybe it does so a bit better than it ought, but it
> took a move to Arwen to open my eyes with regards to understanding
> how the windows api actually works. This is not supposed to be a bash
> against win32lib, but arwen is, at least to me, clearly a better tool
> to write something like an editor with. I will concede that my path to
> learning/understanding the windows api may cloud my judgement.
> IIRC somewhere it may also state that one of win32lib's intentions is
> to make development simpler, even if that is at the cost of the final
> program's performance. In contrast, Arwen says "speed rules!"
>
> There are also a handful of "unfixable" bugs in MEditor. I've been
> pretty anal about copying code from MEditor to Edita without at least
> either thoroughly reviewing it or much more often rewriting it from
> scratch. All in all, Edita is better: upgrade today!
>
> Regards,
> Pete
>
>
Thanks Pete
This is the kind of answers I was looking for.
Regards
Serge
When all you have is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail.
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
