Re: [bug-gtypist] further future of gtypist

[clutton]

On Tue, 2017-01-10 at 20:09 +0100, Felix Natter wrote:
> hello clutton,
> hello Tim,

> How about converting the code to C++ classes while refactoring, I
> would
> help with this!

It could be simpler then refactoring, but a lot of C++ typing tutors
are already exist. My vote is for plain C but with modern codding
techniques C99 or even C11 [although nothing interesting in C11, or I
missed something :)] and just refactoring/rewriting pieces.

More relying on std and syscalls then implementing things by ourselves,
DESIGN!!! and self speaking code with intention of "less lines and more
design".

It wouldn't be ideal at the end: time-resources-knowledge, it never is,
but making it good just in C would be cool IMHO.


> When doing this, we can get away with the typeahead and word
> processor
> features. I agree with clutton [2] that these are useless, since
> every
> word processor / editor has its own heuristics (or none at all) here!
> 
> [2] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gtypist/2016-10/msg00003.h
> tml
> 
> Cheers and Best Regards,

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part