I'd say that's a good thing.
[Spare me the Adobe Updater though, please.]
Then I fled. And a lot of other people probably will, too -- Adobe has a lot of things to make up for with the kind of people who could actually make a meaningful contribution.
Well, we have to start somewhere. We are actually doing a ton around HTML and Web:
(I work for Adobe)
Like what?
Personally, while I'm not happy with every move or product Adobe's ever made, I think by and large their contributions to the web have been a net positive.
My thing is like that too, especially the inception thing, but its better for a lot of reasons because its more than just an editor and is designed to be easily extended with plugins/components.
https://github.com/ithkuil/cureblog
Anyway so good try Adobe, but if Adobe really wants to do the right thing, support the open web, and build a really useful tool, they should scrap Brackets, fork my project, and start promoting that. LOL sorry dickish thing for me to say but true.
And your project doesn't seem to be designed as an IDE, but rather a blogging engine with a strange focus on code editing. How exactly are the projects similar?
The code editor is a component that adds a button to the left hand side, which then opens up a window with CodeMirrors built in for editing the HTML/CSS/Browser side CoffeeScript/ Node.js on server side/external css/js files/package.json for the selected component. Then when you hit save it sends all of those files to the server, compiles CoffeeScript, runs npm if necessary. If there are errors it pops them up in a message box. If there are no errors it restarts the server and reloads the page. So it is an IDE.
Another similarity is the idea of keeping together different aspects of a component such as the HTML and CSS. I take it farther by including the other parts I mentioned above.
Blogging is just the most common type of application so I need to make sure it works for that for starters.
Well, maybe not really, since I can't use it on Linux...
There's some thought been given to multi-level sourcemaps, which are needed for template->js->minified->concatenated... type mappings - see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1U1RGAehQwRypUTovF1KRlpiO...
Also there's something on the feature roadmap for firefox to cover css sourcemaps. Not much info, but its a start: https://wiki.mozilla.org/DevTools/Features/CSSSourceMap
If you tried to apply the same thinking to everything in the UI, you'd hit sprites soon enough. It'd be interesting to have enough info that given an (x,y) in an image we can say what the source files were. This is the kind of thing where the http header in that sourcemaps v3 proposal would apply.
What, not a single mention of Light Table?
As for live code-editing feature, you can already do a lot of these stuff in Chrome's developer tool.
Note: I'm a Vim user. Which I personally think is still the best text/code editor in the world.
Quote from The Brackets blog post "There are a lot of text editors out there, but not too many care exclusively about web developers" -- This is exactly why I'm building LIVEditor (http://liveditor.com)
Now we only need to figure out one thing - way to make it properly support vim bindings ;)
