DonationCoder.com Software > FARR Plugins and Aliases

[IDEA] FARR Plugin: FARRDevelopersBible

(1/2) > >>

Codebyte:
Project Name: FARRDevelopersBible
Project Codename: FARRDB

Project Description:
FARRDB will allow developers to enable FARR with an offline developers "bible" that contains descriptions of functions for each language. This allows FARR to quickly search the developers "bible" using a syntax like "fdb php explode". After typing this expression, FARR will search its dev. bible for php functions, find explode, and return a beautiful description of how to use the explode() function, its parameters, a few examples of explode()'s common usage, etc. (Note: explode() is just an example.) When a user types the expression and then hits enter after viewing its usage, FARR adds an example to the clipboard so we can paste it into place and modify as needed.

Reasoning:
I cannot begin to tell you how annoying it is to waste a browser tab to php.net or some other web source. This plugin would be ideal for developers of any age or experience as we all forget syntax every now and then, especially when switching languages on the go (javascript and php are very close.) I was looking for something like this on DC and found FARRWebMetaSearch. While FARRWebMetaSearch is a great idea, the purpose of this plugin is to use an offline version to eliminate the requirement of internet access. Syntax doesnt change, internet access does.

Parts:
This plugin is a HUGE project as it contains several parts: the FARR plugin that handles searching and reading the individual developer "bibles," the actual developer "bibles" themselves and the example usages for functions.

This plugin would be EXTREMELY popular in my honest opinion. It will add alot more functionality to FARR (as if FARR doesn't already have enough functionality - thanks mouser :))

Note: It's probably a good idea to let this post age into maturity before developing this plugin. The reason I am posting this idea and not coding it is due to the fact that I am extremely busy with my web development and side projects as it is, I wouldnt be able to take on another project for awhile.

Please post your ideas for this plugin so we can formulate, as a community, what would be the best way to approach the project, what features to add, and who would be up for coding it :)

Updates:
- [Change] Made FARRWebMetaSearch a link in 'Reasoning.'

phitsc:
This plugin would be EXTREMELY popular in my honest opinion. It will add alot more functionality to FARR (as if FARR doesn't already have enough functionality - thanks mouser :))
-Codebyte (April 27, 2010, 09:28 AM)
--- End quote ---
Exactly what I thought about my own plugins :D

mouser:
i was talking to ewemoa recently about an idea for searching chm files that he had, for the same purpose you are talking about, being able to search chm programming reference files, etc.

what i was thinking is that perhaps the most efficient way to do this is to let another program fully index the contents of chm files and interface farr to search them.. this may already be doable using the Farr WindowSearch plugin, or maybe by interfacing with another program that already indexes chm files.

so some questions are:

* Is CHM a good/sufficient file format format for this need (i think it's pretty good; being able to use pdf would be nice too)
* Does it make sense for this kind of tool to be based on new custom code for searching through these files, or would interfacing to an existing indexer (like Windows Desktop Search or Google Desktop Search, etc.) be better.
* Is relying on a full desktop indexer like Windows Search too much of a drawback for people who don't like to have such things running because of the background cpu usage

Codebyte:
great questions!

I think CHM/PDF support would be great for this plugin! It would def. add more flexibility to the plugin. However, adding too much flexibility might stray from the point of the plugin. I think that using an existing indexer might be too much extra fluff for stuff we don't really need, resulting in slower indexing and slower processing?. It might be easier on the developer though. opinions?

Codebyte:
hrm, not quite as a popular thread as I assumed. only been a day though. anybody have any comments, questions, sarcasm :) lol

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page