On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 14:53:34 -0400, "John Gabriele" jmg3000@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/22/07, Enrico Tröger enrico.troeger@uvena.de wrote:
On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 12:54:03 -0400, "John Gabriele" jmg3000@gmail.com wrote:
The actual behaviour is, of course, to expand a small piece of text into a larger piece -- regardless of whether or not it's code. So, really, neither "code snippets" nor "snippets" are names that fit actual behaviour. I just thought "snippets" would be simpler, and more general sounding.
Why doesn't fit snippets at all? I think it is good enough and I'm not really sure about your last sentence. You also suggest snippets or you are against? To me it sounds a bit contrary.
What I mean is, "snippet" is a handy little word that is useful not because it has a terribly well-defined meaning, but because it's slang-ey enough that we can assign to it a specific meaning for Geany. I think it's a good fit for use with this Geany feature. It would work well, mostly because people are already familiar with seeing it in other editors, and have a preconceived idea of what it probably does.
So, when I'd suggested using plain "snippets" instead of "code snippets", you'd stated, "IMO it fits the actual behaviour more than auto completion.". I think this is where there was confusion. I was agreeing with you about using the word "snippets" -- I just thought it would be better without the word "code" in front of it. :)
Ok, so finally we both like "snippets" more than "code snippets" and "auto completion" ;-).
Regards, Enrico