Brikface wrote:MudGuard, don't fall into the fallacy that all, or even most, users are like you.
Brikface, don't fall into the fallacy that all, or even most, users are like you.
I fail to see how a program that sits there round-the-clock is going to waste any more RAM than the increased footprint for TextPad as it adds this functionality.
Are the 20% of TextPad users that would use a built-in FTP so adamant that they will leave their text editor over it? As it stands, you are the only one I've seen so insistant on it. It has cropped up before as a request and I'm still willing to admit it could be a "must have" feature for TextPad but I have not heard compelling a reason for it. I see so many viable alternatives to it (mapping a local drive, writing batch scripts to be executed as a tool) as well as a decent reason (seperation of responsibilities) that I have not been convinced it is not "featureitis."
Who knows, perhaps with the next release of TextPad, Windows will have a widget to map a local drive to a DAV resource?
Drxenos wrote:Your arguments are specious at best. You think the RAM requires of an FTP client will suddenly disappear if it is integrated into another program? Besides, as cheap and abundant as RAM is these days, are you really that strapped for memory?
You should think a little more before hauling out words like "specious". Yes, FTP functionality integrated into another program will consume about the same RAM as a separate FTP module. But, my dear Drxenos, when one closes the program with integrated FTP then the RAM consumed is all released. This is distinct from a separate FTP module designed to run all the time, don't you see?
You ask if RAM is really at such a premium, given how much costs have dropped. Are you not aware that the complexity of applications has risen almost exactly parallel to the drop in cost of RAM?... Yes, you are aware. You just fail to apply your awareness.
talleyrand wrote:
I fail to see how a program that sits there round-the-clock is going to waste any more RAM than the increased footprint for TextPad as it adds this functionality.
As I just revealed to Drxenos... the increased footprint of Textpad is *all gone* when Textpad is closed. Something like Webdrive just sits there all the time, taking resources. This is undeniable.
Brikface wrote:You should think a little more before hauling out words like "specious". Yes, FTP functionality integrated into another program will consume about the same RAM as a separate FTP module. But, my dear Drxenos, when one closes the program with integrated FTP then the RAM consumed is all released. This is distinct from a separate FTP module designed to run all the time, don't you see?
You ask if RAM is really at such a premium, given how much costs have dropped. Are you not aware that the complexity of applications has risen almost exactly parallel to the drop in cost of RAM?... Yes, you are aware. You just fail to apply your awareness.
--
Bf
Your feeble attempts at condescension do not make you correct, sir, just an ass. You can shutdown an ftp client just easily when you are finished with it as you can TexPad. Funny you should mention application complexity. That is exactly why we are against you on this. TextPad is an excellent, light weight, fast text editor. Even though this is a Windows application, I prefer the Unix philosophy: small applications that do one thing and do it very well. Code bloat and feature-creep are bad things. I don't want to see them happen to my favorite editor.
Specious: Apparently right; superficially fair, just, or correct, but not so in reality; appearing well at first view; plausible; as, specious reasoning; a specious argument.
[1913 Webster]
Seems an accurate use of the word to me. I would like to ask everyone that we keep this discourse on a professional level and focus on the pros and cons of the integration of non-local file manipulation into TextPad.
Let me tell you about my usage of TextPad---I do not close it. I remain logged in on Windows until I am forced to reboot due to patches or software installation. When I log in, I open a command prompt, I launch TextPad and open whatever communication tool(s) I'm using. After that, programs open and close as needed but TextPad is one of the last things that is ever closed for me. The increased footprint of TextPad's potential FTP ability would be a constant tax on my memory pool, don't you see? This is undeniable.
Here's another suggestions for you to shoot down. You are a Java, C, Perl programmer, why not write a wrapper that kicks off a mapping program ala web/netdrive and then fires off TextPad. When TextPad closes your wrapper kills the mapper process. Is it what you want? No, but it will meet your needs.
One last thought that this discussion has aroused for me is one BF brought up. The subject was the hassle of maintaining separate applications. If connectivity is brought into the TextPad code base, they are now responsible for keeping their speciality (text editing) up to date as well as monitoring this spurious code base. Imagine that Helios flubs the implementation or a flaw is detected in the underlying code base or protocol. Something, anything really, the specifics are irrelevant. The thing to think about is what happens when that happens? If you are using a 3rd party application, they fix their stuff and a release is made, you patch and the change goes unnoticed by all applications using it because they are simply looking at the OS. I am the last to bag on Keith and Stephen for their release schedule because I understand the importance of getting their core competency right vs getting it out the door, but do you really want to wait on them to get a new release out just to fix this most-critical-gotta-have-I-can't-believe-they-don't-have-it-already feature?
talleyrand wrote:I would like to ask everyone that we keep this discourse on a professional level and focus on the pros and cons of the integration of non-local file manipulation into TextPad.
You are, of course, correct. I just get annoyed when someone attempts to win an argument with pomp or patronization. Nor do I like being accused of ignoring facts that disprove my arguments. Though, I shouldn't have stooped to his level. I will try to behave myself.
Brikface wrote:MudGuard, don't fall into the fallacy that all, or even most, users are like you.
Brikface, learn to read - where in my posting do you read anything that makes you think that I assume other users are like me? I don't see it. Where in my post do I say anything about other users? Please note the use of "I" and "my" in each single sentence of my posting.
I gave my arguments why I don't want to have Textpad-internal FTP functions (which were - if they existed - a total waste of my disk space and my RAM, as I never would use them, but often have several instances of Textpad running, each of them blocking some of my RAM for providing these to-me-superfluous FTP commands).
Btw, YOU should not fall into that fallacy yourself - you do not accept that other users (e.g. me) have other wishes.
talleyrand wrote:I would like to ask everyone that we keep this discourse on a professional level and focus on the pros and cons of the integration of non-local file manipulation into TextPad.
You are, of course, correct. I just get annoyed when someone attempts to win an argument with pomp or patronization. Nor do I like being accused of ignoring facts that disprove my arguments. Though, I shouldn't have stooped to his level. I will try to behave myself.
DrX
Get real Drxenos. Your use of the word "specious" was what started the ad-hominem silliness. If you want to disagree with somebody, just say "I disagree and here's why". Don't use a word that impugns the other party's basic intelligence or habits of discourse. From there it's just a classic case of reaping what you sow.
Brikface wrote:Get real Drxenos. Your use of the word "specious" was what started the ad-hominem silliness. If you want to disagree with somebody, just say "I disagree and here's why". Don't use a word that impugns the other party's basic intelligence or habits of discourse. From there it's just a classic case of reaping what you sow.
You feel I attacked you personally by calling your argument "specious"? I cannot help your dislike of my vernacular, nor do I care to. Arguments are specious. People are not specious, nor are intelligences. Saying I "impugn" your intelligence or habits does not make any sense. Intelligence and habit can not be falsified. I did not challenge that your intelligence or your habits were false. I stated your argument is specious, which it is. I am bewildered as to your problem with the word itself. Tanneyrand gave you a perfectly acceptable denotative meaning to the word. If you inferred some derogatory connotative meaning, again, that is something I cannot help.
I disagree and here's why: your argument is specious. Better?
Looking at some of your posts you seem take it personally when someone disagrees with you. I cannot help that either.
No, no Drxenos. You see, the very moment you say "I disagree", your dissatisfaction with the argument is fully implied. To add "specious", aside from being redundant, is ad-hominem. Really, I'm serious. If you're sincere about getting along with people better, take this to heart.
If you insist on "specious" it would greatly help if the argument is in fact flawed. Unfortunately, the argument you attack here is flawless, completely untouched by your counter reasoning.
Yes, let's please stop. Drxenos-- we got off on the wrong foot. I think you might mistake my colloquial way of writing for an attitude problem. I mean no offense, and usually none is taken.
You have a point about avoiding bloat and I believe I have a point about catering to 20 or 30% of users who would find an added function to be a net gain in efficiency, so long as said function can be turned off by those who don't want it and its footprint in source isn't unduly huge (and ftp code isn't). The tension between the two (avoiding bloat vs. broad functionality) is an ongoing balancing act in software dev. that won't end any time soon. Believe it or not I was an early advocate in the movement that eventually broke Firefox out of the huge Mozilla browser codebase (man I remember getting shouted down by a few lead developers who sure changed their tune a ways down the road), but there are also times when inclusion is the way to go... I think enough has been said about this particular balancing act faced by Helios. They can decide on the merits. Probably they'll resist adding FTP until they see people jumping ship from its absence, but perhaps it won't be enough people to rouse them to go for FTP. We'll see... It's a shame it can't be done as an Add-On. You can get a seviceable FTP client going with very minimal code, but I'm afraid the integration with the existing Textpad Save In routines in the GUI would be beyond an Add-On. Maybe this could be a compromise approach in the future? Helios could put out a tiny API giving just enough hooks to do something like this as an Add-on.
I came back again to check up on Textpad versions again - a little down time - to see if there's a new version or FTP support yet. Caught your argument in this topic and commend you for your stick-to-it'ness. Sorry this post is so much after the fact but - I don't (ahem) have an ongoing need to come back too often, now do I?
You must've been blueInTheFace, brikface, after this thread. Ha ha! A pun.
Anyway, the posters arguing against an sFTP/FTP facility may never understand why some of us would love a built-in sFTP/FTP feature in Textpad. And Textpad may never get that feature. I have no current need for "text folding" but it sems to be a hot request in the enhancement surveys. Guess everybody wants something different ...
I suggest you check out Editplus. I subscribed to his Beta-release list and the developer sends out routine update notices with a surprising frequency really for a small $30 text editor. Continuous improvement and he listens to user requests.
But, brikface, I'm with you. I don't administer my own *nix servers and cannot install Samba, Windrive or whatever. I don't want an external batch file I have to configure as a tool plugin. I use Filezilla to FTP images (none of my image editors have FTP widgets and I don't complain about that), but I DO WANT and DO USE an FTP widget in my plain-old text editor. Often. Every day. To several development servers. I use Editplus because it's a lot like Textpad PLUS has a built-in FTP/sFTP facility. It's slick, convenient as hell and just works. When you're writing complex HTML page layout and creative wants things a certain way, it requires persistent tweaks to the HTML source file - a 3rd party/add-in/macro just doesn't cut the mustard. If I didn't have Editplus, I'd use vi all the time on the individual boxes. But I do have Editplus with builtin FTP/sFTP and all I have to do is click the Save icon in the toolbar and reload the page from the server. Sweet.
I come back to Textpad from time to time and compare the latest release with my licensed Textpad copy's Help->About - still stuck at 4.7.3 - and check in the forums. I'll probably stop back again in a few months - it used to be my favorite and still like it's interface/menu-layout a little better than Editplus. I still have a license for both.
