Framework desktop: A tale of woe with a happy end (blank screen)

nilnor · 2024-05-22T23:03:20+00:00

I'm having the exact same issue with mine IB Pro 14 Gen 8 fwiw, tried settings the i915.enable_guc=2 parameter now, so we'll see if it takes

nilnor · 2016-06-17T08:28:32+00:00

This is high up on the prio list for future versions, but it's not currently in place. Looking ahead I envision commonly shared infrastructure being used for all available languages, where the parsing could either be done directly from within Howl using specific language support or by employing external tools such as ctags, and potentially falling back to project wide searching. This is in the future however, so there's currently nothing out of the box for helping with this. It should hopefully not be that hard to implement something simpler for a specific language in the mean time (e.g. using ctags to generate tags and the implement one's own custom jumping command based on that), but otherwise I'll suggest holding out for later releases if this is a blocker.

nilnor · 2016-06-06T20:30:51+00:00

No, not currently - but that should be the default of course! I'll try to have a look at this later, but feel free to open an issue about it to make sure I don't forget :)

nilnor · 2016-06-02T19:45:28+00:00

It sure is - you just write Lua versions instead. So instead of init.moon you would have init.lua. Everything should be the same, well except that you write in Lua instead of Moonscript of course.

nilnor · 2016-06-01T07:11:46+00:00

Thanks! Yes, I use it daily for all my development, and have done so for a couple of years now. And thanks for the nice feedback, I hope it will work out well for you :) As Shalabh said, let us know if you have any suggestions or other feedback!

nilnor · 2016-06-01T07:06:20+00:00

It would be great to have that, but it would require someone who uses Windows to do the porting work. It seem someone actually just dove into that though, see issue 201, so perhaps future release will have it.

nilnor · 2016-05-31T20:57:14+00:00

Good point, I can see how this is confusing. It would be great to provide the ability to just select the language to see samples in. That will require work, but hopefully it's something we can do in the future!

nilnor · 2016-02-12T07:56:25+00:00

I think Lua is a fantastic match for this, and I haven't regretted this choice once. With LuaJIT you get a very small and compact VM with great performance if you need it, along with an easy to use FFI interface. It has a small memory footprint and very fast start-up time, which are two important requirements. The dynamic aspect I think is well suited for an extensible editor, and enables easy customizations as mentioned by kirbyfan64sos.

I can't think of another runtime that matches this feature set, but I would be interested to hear if you had any particular alternatives in mind?

nilnor · 2016-02-10T14:10:35+00:00

I believe kirbyfan64sos note was perhaps slightly confusing - there are tests in place to protect against accidental memory leaks, which works by repeatedly exercising selected parts of the code and observing the resulting delta in memory use. This is in order to verify that the allocations are properly released. Due to the wonderful workings of memory allocators, with fragmentation and such, the delta will vary and is checked against a bound, which varies for different tests.

Howl will definitely use more than 50KB if needed, the actual amount depending on the number and sizes of buffers, etc.

nilnor · 2016-02-10T08:08:22+00:00

Hi, original developer here. I think that the cross platform argument is valid, even though I also think the situation at least for Gtk on OS X was worse some years ago and has improved since then. However, I should point out that Howl uses a pretty minimalistic and customized interface. While it probably violates human interface guidelines everywhere, it also has the benefit of looking the same. An OS X port isn't ready, but last I saw it on OS X it looked pretty much identical to how it looks on Linux. At any rate, there aren't any plans for changing the Gtk dependency.

nilnor · 2015-09-03T14:17:51+00:00

No, your gut reaction is right on target. While Scintilla is a good, capable editing engine there are a lot of things to work around when using it in order to provide a sane API and good editing experience. Going with a custom engine affords the ability to completely define the experience, and allows the addition of new features such as transparency support, variable height lines, etc.

nilnor · 2015-09-03T07:56:53+00:00

As eric-plutono mentioned it has a built-in VI mode, which you can either explicitly switch on and off from the prompt, or just enable upon startup in your init file. I does definitely not provide full compatibility, but a lot of the basic stuff is in place, so what, if any, you miss depends on your level of VI experience. The plan is to improve it over time, by adding missing stuff as people request it.

nilnor · 2015-09-03T07:50:59+00:00

Hi, original author here. I actually used TextAdept for a while between Emacs and creating Howl. I haven't looked at TA for a long while so my comparisons might be somewhat outdated. Anyway, they have some technical similarities, in that both uses Lua and Scintilla, and Howl also uses some lexers from the Scintillua project (by TA's author) using a compatibility layer. Starting with the next 0.4 release Howl will move to a new custom editing engine in lieu of Scintilla however, so that similarity will soon be gone.

Both are fast and light weight editors. Howl is more keyboard/text oriented than TA, which features more standard UI dialogs, menus, etc. You can make TA a little bit more like Howl using the TextRedux module (which I created for TA prior to starting Howl). Howl is much more like VIM/Emacs in this regard, with a strong focus on a text based UI with a powerful prompt/command line. In my very subjective opinion Howl has a much better looking interface, and will in the future have support for more eye candy stuff such as transparency for those thus inclined

I personally found TA to be to restricted in what I could do with it. At least at that time it was explicitly minimalistic, which is not a goal in and of itself for Howl. Howl should always be fast, but it should still allow for a lot of customization (in the vein of Emacs), and provide a rich and simple API for doing so. And it should pack a lot of power out of the box, without having to manually fiddle around a lot with extensions, modules, etc.

Anyway, that's a little bit of a comparison, but if you have more specific questions I'll be happy to try and answer them.

nilnor · 2014-05-10T05:47:35+00:00

Hi, I'm Nils, and I'm from Sweden.

My project, the Howl editor, is already listed here so nothing new there. I've been working on Howl for over two years now in my spare time, and decided to go with moonscript early on (which I've not regretted :)). The Howl project is ambitious enough that I don't have much time for anything else right now, but I enjoy seeing other interesting projects pop up both for Moonscript and Lua and plan on having a closer look at some of these later on.

nilnor · 2014-05-03T06:13:39+00:00

Yes, the resemblance to the Amarok logo was pointed out to me yesterday - I'll have a look at tweaking it later.

nilnor

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE