With respect to "Related scripts": It would be great to have a table that also lists the features of all those plugins. I'd suggest the following features:
- Templates for new files
- Code snippets
- Snippets are defined in vimscript
- Snippets are defined in a single file
- Snippets are defined in one file per snippet
- Named Place-holders
- Dynamic replacement of place-holders with the same name
- Snippets may include executable vimscript code
- Snippets can be configured via user input on expansion
- Conditional expansion
- Inclusion of sub-templates
Besides, I think this page should be easier to find. Thanks.
It's hard work when you get down to the details because you need to spend quite a bit of time trying stuff, and often (I guess) you would find points that don't quite fit into your suggested table. Probably this list should be moved to Vim scripts which is mentioned in the right-hand column of the Main Page. JohnBeckett 22:52, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
I actually think such a table might be useful, though perhaps not quite as detailed. It would be a great candidate for that "transclusion" thing or whatever it was that somebody did with that "ranges cheat sheet" a while back. I'd like to be able to put a list of such plugins in this category, in the Templates category, and in the "see also" section of the various template/snippet tips. Right now, we end up with hard-to-find, incomplete, or outdated information. With a templatted list of snippet/skeleton plugins, we could maintain them in one place and include them everywhere appropriate. --Fritzophrenic 14:43, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
- I don't follow. Wouldn't you just need a page somewhere describing plugins of a particular type -- in a tip you would have a one-line 'see also'? Why would you want to include a list of plugins in more than one tip? JohnBeckett 23:59, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
- In many cases I would agree. In this case, however, I think it is important to have a complete list in at least two places: Category:Automated Text Insertion and Category:Templates. These are places where a person would logically browse for ways to automatically or semi-automatically insert text into their document, and we should make it very obvious that there are a plethora of plugins that already do this. For completeness, it may be good to have a separate page for this, in fact I like the idea of linking to this page from the tips in a "See also" section. We could also put a link on the scripts page. We can use "includeonly" and whatnot in order to include just the list without the description in the two categories mentioned, but I think it is important to have the list. --Fritzophrenic 15:11, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
- You know I'm reluctant to worry too much about categories until other issues are addressed, but my quick response (i.e. no thought at all, and may need to be corrected) is that needing the list in two categories is proof that the categories are badly arranged. Why not do this (which would be easy with my bot): Move all tips that are currently in Category:Automated Text Insertion (ATI) to the appropriate subcategory. Result: ATI holds nothing except subcategories. JohnBeckett 02:14, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
- I had an hard time to come up with a meaningful category for snippets, template-file expanders, completion, automated text-transformation (like selection surrounding, generating doxygen documentation (which I did solved with mu-template for instance), ...), ... In the end I went for ATI as it's almost always the same. The solution, and the category name, is far from perfection.
- BTW, as I see it, all Brackets tips should be merged into one or two tips (one for ATI, one for matching/jumping) (I see this category as a workspace to place all bracket related tips until they are finally merged).
- Regarding the plugins list issue. I think that we should eventually have several pages like: viml library plugins, template/snippets plugins, C/C++ ftplugins, Java ftplugins, Project management and navigation plugins, tags related plugins, and so on.
- --Luc Hermitte 08:29, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
- I guess I'm having trouble seeing any compelling reason not to include a list (via template) in multiple places so that it is more easily found. I think it would be good to have a separate page with a detailed summary of each plugin, but places like this category and the Vim scripts page it may be better to just have a very concise description of each and a link to the page for details. At the very least it would be nice to be able to do this while we wait for the tips to be properly categorized. Would you be opposed to a "try it and see how we like it" approach? --Fritzophrenic 14:59, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
- Fine, let's give it a go. The Vim scripts page is a bit cluttered, but there is some stuff on it that I would not want to rearrange due to third-party considerations, but the stuff at the bottom can probably just be deleted. We're seeing some sophisticated wiki editors passing by, but bear in mind that editing a template is a bit more baffling than just editing a page; for one thing, you don't see how the whole page looks until you save the template, then refresh the page.
- I don't grasp your point about having a separate page with a detailed summary of each plugin. I guess seeing an example would help me understand the scope of the suggestion. Roughly how many plugins are we talking about? Might it become an unmaintainable mess? I like the arrangement at Vim_scripts#Featured_scripts where you can quickly run down the list and grasp the essential details. Would you want to say more than what is shown there? At any rate, sure, trying anything is fine by me. JohnBeckett 23:59, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
- I personally think there should be only one page for that. File templates are IMHO a special case of what Luc calls ATI -- any ATI can be easily turned into template plugin via autocommands. Ideally, such a comparison page could look somewhat like the wikipedia's "List of ..." pages, see e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_instant_messaging_clients.Micathom 13:50, 21 June 2009 (UTC)