11–20 of 29 posts
Wait what? I've used Sublime Text 2 for a little while... but I have the impression that it's a fancy Notepad with a cumbersome configuration system. Is it more with regards to web page editing? Can someone enlighten me?
Too many subheadings, stopped reading
Wouldn't the more obvious conclusion be that Adobe believed 10 years ago that the way to make money was to cater to those that don't want to program and just want something that "works" and now they've decided that there is a large enough user base of people that are willing to pay for tools to help with real programming? I don't think these products would have been at all successful 5 or 10 years ago, the web "wasn'…
Up until a few years ago I was a full time Flash developer, working in ActionScript3 which is a strictly typed, fully OO language which conforms completely with the 4th edition of ECMAScript. I used a great IDE (FlashBuilder) that had full code introspection, static analysis, amazing auto-complete and all sorts of great features built in. Unit testing was not uncommon, as was continuous integration, automated build p…
It is important to note that for half of the glory days it was Macromedia Dreamweaver. Until FlashBuilder, we were told with straight faces to use the Adobe Flash Professional. Remember, FlashDevelop?
I think adobe figured it out maybe 2 years ago.
YES!, Stop neglecting your only good web design product Adobe
"(...) but for now it’s a little underwhelming for those of us who use the outstanding Sublime Text 2 every day". Wait what? I've used Sublime Text 2 for a little while... but I have the impression that it's a fancy Notepad with a cumbersome configuration system. Is it more with regards to web page editing? Can someone enlighten me?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Up until a few years ago I was a full time Flash developer, working in ActionScript3 which is a strictly typed, fully OO language which conforms completely with the 4th edition of ECMAScript. I used a great IDE (FlashBuilder) that had full code introspection, static analysis, amazing auto-complete and all sorts of great features built in. Unit testing was not uncommon, as was continuous integration, automated build p…
You made me nostalgic for my childhood. It is important to note that for half of the glory days it was Macromedia Dreamweaver. Until FlashBuilder, we were told with straight faces to use the Adobe Flash Professional. Remember, FlashDevelop? I think adobe figured it out maybe 2 years ago.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Up until a few years ago I was a full time Flash developer, working in ActionScript3 which is a strictly typed, fully OO language which conforms completely with the 4th edition of ECMAScript. I used a great IDE (FlashBuilder) that had full code introspection, static analysis, amazing auto-complete and all sorts of great features built in. Unit testing was not uncommon, as was continuous integration, automated build p…
You made me nostalgic for my childhood. It is important to note that for half of the glory days it was Macromedia Dreamweaver. Until FlashBuilder, we were told with straight faces to use the Adobe Flash Professional. Remember, FlashDevelop? I think adobe figured it out maybe 2 years ago.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Correct but the article would have been a better read if the author didn't put the exact same words he used in the article in the quote and than place the quote behind the original text.
If you don't quote, it's not a pull quote, it's a heading or an aside. The example given is a bit of a miss, yes, because the same words appear quoted immediately; normally you'd pull something a little deeper in the text (like from the middle of a paragraph).