The Perfect Text Editor

The Perfect Text Editor

Post by nobod » Tue, 17 Jun 1997 04:00:00



........

Quote:> >Have you actually tried that? :) I see you didn't. It is intuitive
> >because when you're in DOS editor, it always says on the bottom:
> >"Press Alt <Enter> to activate menus. Alt is a standard key for menu
> >activation in many non-Unix apps.

> What if you don't have an alt key?  I hardly ever edit files on

If you don't have an Alt key then you're not running DOS on a PC,
my argument was about DOS and PC keyboard hence alternative
comparisons are irrelevant.

Quote:> the same machine where my keyboard is connected.  Even if the
> keyboard happens to have an alt key it won't work unless the
> connection has the bandwidth for an X session.

You don't use DOS editor in an X session, do you? :) Well,
maybe you do in dosemu but then you can't edit files remotely
anyway.
..........

Quote:> >I mean,
> >all the software is evolving and becomes more powerful and easier.
> >However, I don't see much difference between 10 years old VI copy
> >running in SunOS lab and the one installed on my Linux system. It is
> >still as hostile as it used to be.

> Hostile?  You mean it is still just as easy as ever for the people
> who took the small amount of time to learn it 10 or 15 years ago.
> Think of all the mouse-miles they've saved by now, not to mention
> the time wasted trying to make <alt> work over a telnet session.

You don't use DOS editor over a telnet session. I didn't mean
Alt was a good key. I didn't advocate Alt keys. All I said was
to show that it was _intuitive_ to exit DOS editor. I actually
hate Alt key myself.

I will stop arguing when VI users agree that there's no Perfect
Editor. :)

--

#include <disclaimer.h>  |     *Good pings come in small packets*
       Vancouver         |     Windows: for IQs smaller than 95
   British Columbia      | SIGSIG -- signature too long (core dumped)

 
 
 

The Perfect Text Editor

Post by Richard Ken » Tue, 17 Jun 1997 04:00:00


Could this thread please come to an end soon - it is starting to get a bit
"my text editor is better than yours". Lets face it, any text editor you
can get used to, which suits your way of working and lets you perform all
the operations you require easily and swiftly is the one for you. Besides
there are none to beat Hisoft's Devpac Editor on the Amiga :)

I do have a question however - is there a version of NEdit which does
C/C++ "colorisation" (ala Visual C++) ?

Cheers,

TicH

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Name  - Richard Kent (Tich)
               Plan  - I used to have one....honest

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 
 
 

The Perfect Text Editor

Post by Jahwan K » Wed, 18 Jun 1997 04:00:00


    I wonder how many atheists will read this posting of mine about this
endless holy war.

    But anyway, the point I want to make here is, that this thread should be
about editors themselves, not about how key strokes were configured.  When
talking about *the* perfect text editor, we've got to talk about what
functions it should have, what limits it (unfortunately) has, in what ways
it can help a user edit his plain text files, in what ways it can assist a
programmer do his/her job.  Also it should be discussed how (conveniently)
can one configure it to let it do what he/she wants.
    Convenience and usefulness of default key mappings can give it (huge)
advantage.  But the (endless religious) question whether 'ZZ' is better than
'^X ^C', etc., belongs to another thread, say 'Ergonomical Key Mappings for
Text Editor', IMHO.  You can make vi exit when you type ^X ^C, emacs exit
when you type 'ZZ'.

Jahwan

 
 
 

The Perfect Text Editor

Post by Steve Madi » Wed, 18 Jun 1997 04:00:00



: > I knew but I could care less. It doesn't just use :q for exiting
: > by the way, it uses Esc/Shift/;/q/Enter.

: Nope, four:
: Esc/Shift/z/z

Nope.  Three:
Shift/z/z

I spend an awful lot of time in 'command' mode instead of
'insert' mode, so for me the Esc is usually not needed.

Gee, this is a silly thread, isn't it?

 
 
 

The Perfect Text Editor

Post by AT Fade » Wed, 18 Jun 1997 04:00:00



-> On the other hand, it really doesn't matter. The best editor is the
-> one you are familiar with. I think the search-and-replace patterns
-> in vi and yes - ed - are the best thing that has ever happened.
-> And someone will think that EMACS (Escape-Meta-Alt-Control-Shift :-)
)
-> is the best. Or Pico. Joe. Jed. Or "echo .... >> file".
-> But reading the docs helps saving keystrokes in any editor :-)
->
->         Frank

Personally I think the search/replace (in emacs) is nice, but - it
should support wildcards better.  Like one should be able to do
a replace for a pattern like "1??? ABA ?" -> "1??? XYZ 1" and get the
intended result of just changing the "ABA ?" to "XYZ 1".

 
 
 

The Perfect Text Editor

Post by Sven Guck » Wed, 18 Jun 1997 04:00:00




> >BTW, vi has a quick write-all-changes-and-exit command ZZ  if  you
> >don't mind remembering one of the non-mnemonic short-cut commands.
> Isn't Z the end of the alphabet?  Seems like a
> sensible key to use to end your edit session...

Yes - last letters of the English alphabet,
but sixth within the Greek alphabet,
and seventh of the Hebrew alphabet,
and 22nd within the Russian alphabet.

Whaddaya mean - "off topic"?  ;-)

okok - back to "The Perfect Text Editor".

Sven

--
"Look, Ma, - three newsgroups in the header!"

 
 
 

The Perfect Text Editor

Post by Ben R. Boul » Wed, 18 Jun 1997 04:00:00



> and either getting rid of that command mode altogether or leave it
> for someone who needs it for some more advanced operations.

Let's see you insert a ^C character into a file in pico or dos edit.  The
comamnd mode does have some advantages.  It's also very easy to drive vi
from a script, and you can also imbed vi inside a program to create a
quick and dirty data-entering program with nice editing capabilities.

As soon as somebody takes the time to learn vi, they love it.  Everytime
I use dos edit, I end up pushing / and then realizing I have to instead
go through a whole mess of menu commands to do a search.  Vi is very
quick once you learn it.  And a good version of vi will have a display at
the bottom telling you whether you're in insert or command mode.

Ben Boule

 
 
 

The Perfect Text Editor

Post by Matthias Buel » Wed, 18 Jun 1997 04:00:00



: Personally I think the search/replace (in emacs) is nice, but - it
: should support wildcards better.  Like one should be able to do
: a replace for a pattern like "1??? ABA ?" -> "1??? XYZ 1" and get the
: intended result of just changing the "ABA ?" to "XYZ 1".

No problem.  Emacs supports regular expression matching, the same way
as any other proper editor.

--
        --token

 
 
 

The Perfect Text Editor

Post by Ronald G. Belche » Wed, 18 Jun 1997 04:00:00



> I will stop arguing when VI users agree that there's no Perfect
> Editor. :)

Well, Vlad, I am a "born-again" vi user, for about six years now,
and I am perfectly willing to agree that there is _no_ Perfect
Editor, vi included.  

Will you stop arguing about what is essentially a religious topic
now?  Being religious, there is no final answer anyway.  :-)

(Being unable to resist this final shot, vi is not the perfect
editor, it is just way ahead of whatever is in second place! ;-)
--
------------------------------------------------------------


           |   PHONE:    (914) 892-4214

------------------------------------------------------------

 
 
 

The Perfect Text Editor

Post by Alan Shutk » Wed, 18 Jun 1997 04:00:00


AT> Personally I think the search/replace (in emacs) is nice, but - it
AT> should support wildcards better.  Like one should be able to do a
AT> replace for a pattern like "1??? ABA ?" -> "1??? XYZ 1" and get
AT> the intended result of just changing the "ABA ?" to "XYZ 1".

You get this result by doing

M-x query-replace-regexp "\(1??? \)ABC\( 1\)" "\1XYZ\2"

but I haven't seen any editor which does it the way you describe.
Could you give an example?

(Incidently, to be pedantic, these are regular expressions, not
wildcards.  The upshot of that is that you can get really hairy
regexps, and I'm not sure how your suggestion could be handled in the
general case.)

--

Never kick a man, unless he's down.