Chocolat 1.0 Released

http://fileability.net

by dcope • 14 years ago

90 91 14 years ago

fileability.net

techx2501• 14 years ago

I don't understand. But then again, I've havent used a Mac recently. Does this do something that Eclipse can't?

drudge• 14 years ago

You mean other than function well and not eat RAM?

earl2• 14 years ago

Eclipse is one of the best java editing environments though, in terms of understanding java and not just editing text. Yes it's fidgety and ram hungry, but using it is a significant improvement over vim etc strictly in terms of my productivity. Though it may only really demonstrate value on larger apis; if you can keep most of an api in your head, ie it's a very small java project using few external libs, it may not do much for you.

And I just bought 16GB of ram for my macbook for $150; it's from crucial which I've had good experiences with but it's as expensive as it gets for 2x8GB. So that's a pretty trivial expense for your development environment: $75 a year.

fareesh• 14 years ago

Is there some sort of secret to getting Eclipse to work without being really slow? Someone once mentioned using the latest Java, but I've yet to give that a try. Frankly it's the only thing that demotivates me from writing Android apps.

TylerE• 14 years ago

Throw LOTS of RAM at it. 8gb seems to be a good starting point.

frou_dh3• 14 years ago

Apps considered good Mac apps typically use native GUI or polished custom GUIs that fit the aesthetic and conventions. Multi-platform stuff like Eclipse and MonoDevelop are slapdash in that department.

rayiner2• 14 years ago

Not suck up 3-4% of your CPU just sitting there, preventing the CPU in your laptop from sleeping and wasting battery life.

billpixby• 14 years ago

$10 more bucks gets you Sublime Text 2 :)

freditup2• 14 years ago

If I was using a Mac, this would seem to have the same features as Sublime and more. Not sure though, haven't tried this one out obviously.

balac• 14 years ago

don't underestimate the awesome ST2 community extensions: http://wbond.net/sublime_packages/community

m_eiman• 14 years ago

Perhaps, but this once feels a lot more OSX native than ST2.

frou_dh3• 14 years ago

ST2 may not be perfect, but it's had a damn good effort put in to it to feel like a good Mac app. I had a niggly suggestion regarding menus during the beta and IIRC it was implemented and released within a few days.

avolcano2• 14 years ago

There's some themes for ST2 that make it much more palatable on OSX, if you're concerned about aesthetics. My favorite is Soda:

https://github.com/buymeasoda/soda-theme/

michaelmartin4• 14 years ago

I've swapped to Chocolat as my full time text editor. I find it to be a really good cross between a plain+powerful text editor like Vim, but still with some of the pleasant UI touches of Espresso and such.

Its speed of development is great as well. It seems to get updates every week or two in the past few months. Compared to Textmate/Espresso/Coda etc, that's a real breath of fresh air.

That said, I haven't used Sublime 2 yet, and it seems to aim for similar goals, so no calls on which is best.

PS - You have to like the release notes:

"Feature – Major improvements to the version number. "

earl2• 14 years ago

Could you say more about what you specifically find to be better than vim? thank you.

michaelmartin4• 14 years ago

Sure thing. It's probably easiest to explain by comparing it with the other options. You could say that Vim is one end of a scale (Hardcore keyboard power usage), and Coda/Espresso are on the other (Very designed, and try to do pretty much everything). I really like Chocolat because it's a sweet spot in the middle for me.

I get a beautifully clean experience like in Vim, along with plenty of useful keyboard shortcuts, but still a pleasant UI, regular cursor, and convenience features like a file browser, highlighting recurrences of a word, quick jump into my recent projects etc.

It's not that it does one particular thing that other editors don't (Feature-wise, I can't think of anything that only Chocolat does). Instead, it's the combination of what it does and doesn't do that I like.

mariusandra2• 14 years ago

There are 14 competing text editors. I know, I'll make the best one and end this dispute once and for all! There are 15 competing text editors.

crazygringo• 14 years ago

Text editors are not standards, like sockets or protocols. They're programs.

The more competition, the better!

koenigdavidmj• 14 years ago

Yet another editor with a half-baked Vim mode!

dekz2• 14 years ago

Surely all editors will have half-baked Vim unless the editor is actually Vim.

zem2• 14 years ago

http://jvi.sourceforge.net/

zhuzhuor• 14 years ago

cross-platform wins everything

hbhanu• 14 years ago

I don't know if it wins -everything-, but one purchase working on all my OSes? That's pretty awesome. And with the prices so close, I really can't justify buying Chocolat over ST2. :/

comex2• 14 years ago

I'm very reluctant to consider any editor that's not scriptable. Or if it is, it doesn't seem to be mentioned on the website...

Derbasti3• 14 years ago

And not cross platform.

Open Source would be nice, too, but I would not consider it a strict requirement.

jsilence• 14 years ago

emacs 24.1 has just been released.

ajacksified2• 14 years ago

Neat, but, why not vim, which does all of these things? What differentiates it and justifies $50?

Me10002• 14 years ago

Believe it or not, a _lot_ of people don't like vim.

kintamanimatt• 14 years ago

Sacrilege! Burn the heathen!

thom2• 14 years ago

I don't like vim, but I'd still use it before spending $50 on a text editor that did less.

wonderzombie• 14 years ago

I haven't used Chocolat, but I did use Vim for ~10 years and switched to ST2 some months ago. Still, both ST2 and Chocolat ship with a bunch of commonly used features without having to install and configure N plugins by hand.

Three things:

1. I'm supporting an independent developer. I want to live in a world where someone can make money off of writing great software, especially something I use day in and day out.

2. I amortize the cost ($60 for ST2) across all the time I spend coding. That's a small amount of money in the end, especially if I feel my overall quality of life has improved.

3. The time spent configuring, tweaking, and troubleshooting Vim configs and plugins is time spent not doing work. This made sense to me when I used to value my time at $0. Now that I want to spend less time tweaking and more time working, though, time is all the more precious and it's zero sum.

Now, I am willing to spend some time configuring my tools, but these days I am much more receptive to something that ships with a bevy of useful features where configuration is mostly optional, as opposed to necessary.

YMMV, etc.

ajacksified2• 14 years ago

Oh, I agree totally on the paying-the-dev front; I'd buy this before boxed software for sure. This looks like a great tool if you don't have the time for vim's learning curve. Pathogen and git submodules take care of the configuration for me in vim, fwiw.

dedene• 14 years ago

Is there something like the Zen Coding as in Sublime Text 2 possible with Chocolat?

calinet62• 14 years ago

Unfortunately, the new standard in text editors has been set...

Chocolat, put up a direct comparison with Sublime Text 2, and tell me what you do better, and what you do worse. Be honest.

Then and only then might I consider even trying your software.

Just the harsh reality of the current market.

pruman• 14 years ago

I tried Sublime Text 2, loaded up a 150mb log file. It took over one minute to load, then crashed a few seconds later. I uninstalled it and am keeping Notepad++ and donating money to it.

ique• 14 years ago

I have personally never (thankfully) had to edit a log file larger then perhaps 10mb.. May I ask what you do if you open those kinds of files so often that you let that be the deciding factor in choosing editor?

mariusandra2• 14 years ago

log files like that are opened with cat and grep on the console.

calinet62• 14 years ago

Really? I'm honestly surprised.

One of the things I love about Sublime 2 is how it handles large files.

I just ran `cat /dev/urandom > test.log` for about 15 seconds to generate a 160MB file, and it's currently opening in the background with a nice smooth status bar in Sublime, using up a single yielding thread while remaining completely and entirely UI responsive while loading. You can cancel loading at any time by closing the file; this doesn't interrupt workflow or slow you down at all if you accidentally open a massive file (awesome).

It finished opening the entire 1.1 million (!) line file in about 2 minutes, followed by a brief 3 second delay, followed by displaying it perfectly in the editor. I could smoothly scroll through the whole file (as smooth as if it were 100 lines), even using the minimap that displays a small representation of the whole file. Memory usage jumped about 200 MB, but that's to be expected and is rather efficient considering the task.

I'm not a Sublime evangelist or anything, just saying my experience completely contradicts yours, to such a degree that I think of Sublime second when I want to open large files.

Why second? Well, because you should really be using command line tools for files that big anyway.

*edit: Almost forgot to delete that test file. Whew.

desireco422• 14 years ago

I never had problems with large files on Sublime Text, in fact when vim chokes on those, I open them in Sublime. Notepad++ does handle those with ease, but only on win, Sublime Text is cross platform.

pwenzel• 14 years ago

Pro Tip: If you have to open huge files on a Mac, use TextWrangler. No, not BBEdit. TextWrangler. It's fast as shit with giant log files and SQL dumps.

Karunamon• 14 years ago

Still doesn't handle YAML completely right. Try nesting quotes and using newlines within a single key- the highlighting gets completely confused.

Then try the same thing in BBEdit/Textwrangler to see the difference:

Chocolat: http://c.tkwa.re/2G1O2x3T2f1F1Y0I2G1t

TextWrangler: http://c.tkwa.re/3w1V1V2g0I0H0C2t422t

frou_dh3• 14 years ago

This touches on something that bugs me about all the commercial editors using TextMate-compatible bundles for language support: It's not clear who, if anyone, is maintaining the bundle for a specific language.

I doubt the developer of editor XYZ commits to actively maintaining the 2 dozen language bundles they distribute with their editor. So support for language X might forever be that Last-updated-4-years-ago zip file that perhaps wasn't even the definitive version when it was found, especially for the less community-orientated languages.

zem2• 14 years ago

but if someone writes a better textmate bundle, all the editors can now use it! it's not like vim and emacs support all the languages themselves either.

icefox• 14 years ago

Can we have the title changed to: Chocolate, a text editor for Mac 1.0 released

yottabyte472• 14 years ago

Erm. So. It's name is "Chocolat".

Samuel_Michon• 14 years ago

Its vs. it’s:

http://www.betteratenglish.com/grammar-mistakes-that-make-yo...

Also see McKean's law: “Any correction of the speech or writing of others will contain at least one grammatical, spelling, or typographical error.”

richbradshaw2• 14 years ago

I guess they assumed most people would know what it is. To be honest, everything you've never heard of is likely a text editor for OSX, there seems to be an unusually huge number of them!

bigdubs• 14 years ago

sublime text 2 was not the intended comp; textmate was (hence the compatibility with tmbundles etc.)

i use chocolat and enjoy it (have been using it since it's early open beta). the intellisense (or whatever you want to call it) feature is nicely implemented. the vim mode, though shallow, works if you're used to those key bindings for basic movement and editing etc.

i like it, overall. do i like it enough to pay $50 for it? probably not.

kylec• 14 years ago

I've been using the Chocolat betas for a while and it really is a nice editor. Worth $50, I don't know - for around that price you can get Sublime Text 2, BBEdit, or TextMate, all of which are more mature products.

I think Chocolat could be wildly successful as the "Pixelmator" to these other editors "Photoshop" if they dropped the price and sold it through the Mac App Store. But as it stands now, there's nothing that compells me to purchase it.

adamjernst• 14 years ago

$50 is equal to about 20 minutes-60 minutes of your time. Chocolat has easily saved me that much frustration and time. So it's worth it for me.

throwaway54-762• 14 years ago

Vim has saved me that much frustration and time. Maybe I should donate $50 to that Ugandan charity (ICCF?) that Moolenaar likes.

avolcano2• 14 years ago

Not to pick on you in particular, but I think it's a bit disingenuous to try to say "something is priced to be worth about X amount of time" - it entirely depends on the person and their financial situation.

I've used Sublime Text 2 for a year without actually buying it, but I've also been unemployed college student for the same amount of time, so I can't justify dropping $60 on something optional when I could be stocking up on ramen or paying rent.

batista2• 14 years ago

In the third world country I live in, $50 is 4 months salary.

I'm pulling your leg now, but wanted to make a point.

Plus, it doesn't matter if $50 is equal to 60 minutes of my time or not. What it matters is if $50 is a fitting price for such a product.

Would you buy a can of Coke for $50 because it's "equal to 60 minutes of your time"?

pdeuchler• 14 years ago

XKCD is always relevant: http://xkcd.com/927/

I am, actually, a Chocolat user. I'm essentially using it as a TextMate2 replacement... comes with all the niceties of TM truffles and it's easy on the eyes. Does what I need it to do well, nothing more, nothing less.

raimondious• 14 years ago

The app crashed the first time I opened it. The second time, I opened a file and the Python syntax mode marked lines in my file as invalid, even though they aren't and no other text editor marks them as such. It seems premature for a 1.0 release.

septerr• 14 years ago

what languages does it support?

Derbasti3• 14 years ago

Two questions:

1. Is it scriptable? 2. Does it have macros?

These are honest questions. The website did not mention anything at first glance. But without those, I would not consider it a serious text editor.

On the other hand, it not being cross platform makes it pretty much unusable for me.

cybersunil• 14 years ago

Congrats on the 1.0 release. I have been following Chocolat's progress since a few months now and am impressed with how well it has improved.

EternalFury• 14 years ago

For real? $49?

You have all that and so much more in jEdit for $0.

jamie_ca• 14 years ago

The single feature I long for that I've never seen in any other editor is the tree view of open buffers. It's 100% outstanding.

Alas, it's not enough to make me stick with it.

Chocolat 1.0 Released

Related Stories