I love find in files - saves me every minute of the day, it's fast and ST2 is the first editor to make it easier than using find at the command line. Thanks. However, I tend to have a few configs that I use all the time - usually combinations of directories and file globs. It would make life even easier if I could save those configs and then pick them from a popup, say at the end of the "where" entry box. I'd settle for recents but better would be to save them somewhere (or even create a settings file).
Because really, for many things like choosing html images (img[src]), previewing Marcdown files, previewing image files selected on the side bar so we need some kind of iframe inside Sublime; if you want to to implement this in the most painless way you can use a Chrome app; all the platforms you support also have support for Chrome (or Chromium).
Could be nice if code inside "active" brackets/tags are more visible than "parent" code - since coding is fokused at cursor level and since we typically code deeper the further we code - the "parent" level code gets distracting. Maybe fade more the bigger distance upwards?
Dont know if it makes sens, bit hard to explain, kind of code level fade.
Like many who took part in this year's UN climate talks, I leave Warsaw tired. Not as tired as those that spent two weeks talking, drafting, wrangling, redrafting and horse-trading, followed by an almost 40-hour marathon final session. But I do feel tired. I'm tired by the fact that all of that effort, energy and, in the main, goodwill has again resulted in so little progress.
Where does it go wrong? Nobody can now dispute that climate change is a threat to human society, to the planet as a whole. Nobody can genuinely be confused about what we need to do to reduce this threat. But still inaction seems to be an option, for some the preferred option.
Should we blame those tired negotiators and their governments? Did they draw too many red lines? Did they turn the negotiations into hopeless rhetorical tangles? Can we blame them for putting the interests of their citizens ahead of citizens from other countries or continents? Can we blame them for looking towards re-election? For remembering who put them in office? For reflecting on who donated the most to their campaign coffers?
Or should we blame the UN process? Are there too many voices at the table? Too much semantic hair-splitting, procedural squabbling and high-level posturing? Too much politics? Too many egos? Too much pride?
On the environment, the Abbott government has departed from the Howard years of striking a balance with conservation values and listening to the concerns constituents have for the environment.
Balancing economic growth with sustainability had been at the forefront of legislative and regulatory protection, including the Howard government’s Environment Protection and Bio-diversity Conservation Act (1999). But the scrapping of the Environment Defenders Office (EDO) is symbolic of the distinctive shift we are seeing with this government.
The EDO has played a crucial role in providing free legal advice to communities that wish to question and challenge decisions, such as coal seam gas drilling or dredging of the Great Barrier Reef. But in the context of a government that is driven to extract ‘every molecule’ of gas and every last seam of coal from the driest country on earth, it has deemed that opposition to mining is not to be tolerated.
The really bad news for climate change mitigation policy is that the Abbott government’s open season on the environment will distract Australian’s from climate policy settings, which is the one area to which all environmental issues will one day be subordinated. It is not to say that ‘environmental politics’ as we have known it in the past, which is focused on protecting or ‘saving’ particular sites, be it the Franklin, Jabiluka or the Leard State Forest, are unimportant, it is that such politics is about to be dwarfed by something far less tangible, but unimaginably more powerful.
The Abbott government has not only withdrawn the respect that was accorded to the environmental public sphere by previous Labor and LNP governments, it has also ramped up the assault on climate change mitigation to a level that could only be described as pure and total war. Sure, the Howard government refused to sign the Kyoto Protocol, but concession to public opinion with initiatives like the Renewable Energy Target were important. By contrast, this government appears to be on a pre-meditated crusade to dismantle every policy and initiative that is remotely related to addressing climate change.
Australia is the only nation currently demolishing a working carbon price, which has, in its very short life so far, already mitigated 40 megatonnes of C02.
The administrative and advisory infrastructure put in place to tackle climate change has been all but eradicated. To rehearse the measures:
- I.Abolishing the Climate Commission
- II.Axing of COAG’s Environment Ministers Forum after 41 years.
- III.Scrapping the Biodiversity Fund, Clean Energy Finance Corporation and Environmental Defenders Offices
- IV.Foreshadowing the abolition of the climate change Authority in July
- V.Cutting funding to the: Caring for our Country Program, Low Carbon Communities Program, and the Australian Renewable Energy Agency.
Perhaps the decision invoking the most contempt relates to the Clean Energy Fund. Originally, the Abbott government had claimed that abolishing Clean Energy Finance Corporation will cost the budget A$439 million. However, it now transpires that investing in renewable energies is highly profitable, and the taxpayer is actually going to lose $760 million instead. The contradictions here don’t stand up to even rudimentary analysis. On the one hand the Abbott government dogmatically claims that these cuts are economically driven, but this is patently false when it comes to the CEFC. But perhaps the worst recent decision is the mischievous way the Galilee Basin Coal mining and Abbot Point dredging decisions were made.
With Abbot Point, a dose of the finest ‘greenwash’ environmental values are being administered by the Department of the Environment to justify dredging a reef of three million cubic metres of mostly clay particles that that take so long to sink to the sea floor as to be certain to drift over protected zones of the Great Barrier Reef.
It remains to be seen whether the ‘most stringent’ protections will be at all effective given that the first environmental study on Abbot Point emphatically recommended that the dredging spoil be moved onto land. But the window-dressing of the dredging issue, as serious as it is , pales compared to the amount of coal (3.5 billion tonnes) that is to be exported through Abbot Point from Clive Palmer’s ‘China First’ mine in the Galilee Basin. That such a huge venture could be approved (as it was under the cover of the dying down of the news cycle five days before Christmas last year) is utter madness. The approval of this mine is the single most devastating anti-mitigation decision that this government has so far taken on climate change. The embedded emissions in the 3.5 billion tonnes of China First are equivalent to the total emissions that Australia will produce between now and 2020.
It makes the idea that the government’s “direct action” plan is supposed to reduce Australia’s emissions to 5% of 2000 levels by 2020 (which itself if looking like an interstellar long shot) into a cynical joke.
Of course, it is not just simply the jewel in an over-driven ideological campaign to enrage the climate crisis lobby. Rather, it is politically driven by the pragmatics of what is in store for Australia should the government have the expected Senate majority come July 1. At that point, Abbott will be sure to call in the debt that Palmer owes him over the Galilee Basin, and a flood of legislation is likely to be introduced to annihilate every last bollard of climate change mitigation infrastructure and policy. So narrowly driven is this government that believes climate change to be a socialist plot dressed up as environmentalism.
And this is 2014. Even Margaret Thatcher, who in the late 1980s expressed similar sentiments toward environmental social movements, was rolling out policies to tackle climate change. Thatcher was, after all, trained as a scientist and her ultra-conservative government nevertheless did listen to scientists. Thatcher was committed to protecting her constituents from the coming crisis. But not Abbott. The radical conservatism of the Coalition seems to be drawn from the same platform as the Institute for Public Affairs (IPA), which has entreated Abbott to ‘Be Like Gough’.
In a document posted on its website, the IPA declares open season on just about every publicly interested authority and organisation in Australia for which climate change ranks at the very top. Of 75 recommendations, climate change figures in four of the first six. These include:
- 1.Repeal the carbon tax, and don’t replace it.
- 2.Abolish the Department of Climate Change
- 3.Abolish the Clean Energy Fund
- 4.Repeal the renewable energy target
With recent talk that Abbott is about to appoint IPA ‘anti-renewable zealot’ Alan Moran to a new independent panel to review the Renewable Energy Target, it looks likely that all four of these recommendations will be ticked off nicely.
Nowhere on the planet is there a region that is going to feel the effects of climate change on its population than Australia, with heat-stressed soils, heatwaves, firestorms, flooding and cyclones. And yet, we have a government doing its level best to maximise measures that will only exacerbate global warming.
main.cc:403 value_loaded loading bindings
theme.cc:188 texture_loaded theme loaded
main.cc:198 callback_finished app ready
snippet_manager.cpp:104 attachSnippets loaded 918 snippets
io_requests.cc:343 run scanning /home/fyuan/xdev4/bt
io_requests.cc:348 run scanned /home/fyuan/xdev4/bt
file_buffer_source.cpp:270 cancelRead Unable to wait for read thread to exit
Co-worker was using build 2011.02.03 which worked. He upgraded and it no longer works.
search results does not points to correct position in file after adding or removing lines from that file
1. Press Ctrl+Shift+F to search in all projects for some string.
2. Suppose that more that two entries has been found in the first file.
3. Press F4 to go to the first found entries.
4. Press Enter several times to add new lines.
5. Press F4 to go to the second found entry.
Problem: observe that we had moved to wrong position do to file modification.
When ST2 shows the open file dialog, and then I close it, the windows borders of the system are lost (the window decorator crashed); but everything's OK if no dialog is shown (luckly there are many in ST2). Even worse, when opening the about box, the entire X server crashs and subsequently, all graphical programs also end. I'm using Ubuntu 10.04.3 and ST2 rev 2111. If I must attach some other system information, just ask what to look for.
- Copy'n'Paste the first line with Cmd+C/Cmd+V => All is good
- Copy'n'Paste the first line with yy/p (Vintage Mode), result is the second line
Overlays alter the appearance of a buffer's text on the screen, for the sake of presentation features. An overlay has a specified beginning and end. It also has properties that you can examine and set; these affect the display of the text within the overlay.
Customer support service by UserEcho