RE: "Adobe Brackets like" editing in emacs

[arthur miller]

I think it sounds reasonable. We could have a limit on how big snippets are "inlined" in the buffer, for example 20 lines of code, or 50 or something like that. What about combining with feature like folding, so that longer function, classes etc are brought in as folded?

Below is a picture how they have implemented in Bracktes, but nothing says that Emacs has to implement same way. I would be fine with just different color on background for inlined code, but even if it was not such features, just brining in the code would be nice.

http://dev.brackets.io/preso/intro/assets/features/brackets-quick-edit-js.PNG

> To: address@hidden
> From: address@hidden
> Subject: Re: "Adobe Brackets like" editing in emacs
> Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 08:49:04 -0400
>
> On Wed, 19 Mar 2014 00:00:56 -0400 Richard Stallman <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> TZ> A quick peek+edit in a #include in C, or "use My::Module" in Perl (where
> TZ> you can say `perldoc -l My::Module' to find the module file), etc. would
> TZ> be handy.
>
> RS> We already have such features, but they display the other file in
> RS> another buffer. Why is it useful to put them in one buffer?
>
> So you don't have to switch buffers (and mental context). Most of the
> time in C I'm flipping between a .h and a .c file. This feature would
> work well for *short* includes, IMO. With long includes you lose
> context and nothing is gained.
>
> I would make an analogy here to Literate Programming, where you
> interweave documentation within the code. We're talking about
> interweaving included snippets to build a dynamic whole.
>
> RS> What does it look like, to have multiple files in one buffer?
>
> That's a UI design question and could be up to the implementation, not
> in Emacs. I personally would like something akin to a folding editor
> with clear delineation (maybe statically indented N spaces, like your
> quotations) but would have to experiment to find the best interface.
> It's definitely not going to look like anything we have today.
>
> Ted
>
>