It makes me happy seeing nano being considered this way. Some of the features cited in the article were developed, improved, influenced or implemented by me; mainly macros and external commands.
It is possible to use the linter combined with macros as a "go to implementation" or "go to declaration"[1]. I think it is also possible to do the same so it can get completions from external commands.
I'd like to improve nano enough to make it a good IDE, but its main developer is against it.
It makes me happy seeing nano being considered this way. Some of the features cited in the article were developed, improved, influenced or implemented by me; mainly macros and external commands.
It is possible to use the linter combined with macros as a "go to implementation" or "go to declaration"[1]. I think it is also possible to do the same so it can get completions from external commands.
I'd like to improve nano enough to make it a good IDE, but its main developer is against it.
[1] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/nano-devel/2018-05/msg000...