RE: A radical idea: a new XyWrite

["Carl Distefano" cld@xxxxxxxx]

Reply to note from Philip White  Sat, 21 Apr 2018
15:15:39 +0000

Phil,

Absolutely no nostagia for XyWrite here -- because I still use it for
real work, and fun, every day. (I'm another user, by the way, who's
happily employed it as a front end to LaTeX -- and Python, and AutoIt,
and C, and assembler. I like having my familiar editing customizations,
whatever I happen to be writing.)

Kari,

> My experience is that Xy4 imposes its ways over Xy3 files. Sure,
> you can read them in, but from then on they follow Xy4 rules.

Not true if you set your defaults meticulously -- a one-time exercise.
I honestly think that the trauma of Signature (a half-baked and truly
awful product that I personally found unusable) blinded many Xy3 users
to the overwhelming superiority of Xy4 when it came out a couple of
years later. Xy4 and Signature are night and day. And, in terms of
customizability, Xy4 is far superior to Xy3. Much of the stuff that we
do in U2 could be only done in Xy3 with great difficulty, or not at
all.

But ... this is a train that left the station a quarter century ago,
and I do not intend to retrace those tracks. Just saying that I would
have little interest in contributing to a project that didn't support
Xy4 XPL and U2. Wasn't that the whole point of Harry's "radical idea"
to begin with?

--
Carl Distefano
cld@xxxxxxxx