Category: Best Open Source Text Editor 114
Nobody loves a good old fashioned vi/emacs war more than me, so we decided to create a category in the Slashdot 2000 Beanies just as an excuse to have a flamewar! Nominate your favorite text editor, and let the good times roll.
perl (Score:1)
How to remember how to quit VI. (Score:1)
: = colon thing (everyone knows what a colon also could be, right?)
q = quit and do
! = NOT
RETURN = return.
Instead use ED, the only editor with a easy to learn user interface. You only need to learn the ? character.
cat (Score:1)
I love this quote: James Gosling on Bill Joy
http://java.sun.com/j avaone/keynotes/transcripts/schmidt.html [sun.com]
vim (Score:1)
vim!!!!! (Score:1)
Re:vi: not just useful, but fun to watch (Score:1)
To indent an entire file that's compressed and sitting on a machine in the other hemisphere:
C-x C-f
C-x h select the entire contents of the file
C-M-\ indent the file (M-x indent-region if you prefer)
C-x C-s save the file
...how can you call vi a programmer's editor if you can't program it?
-Pez
vi, what else? (Score:1)
It can be naught but vi, the true editor
Re:vim ! (Score:1)
--Alex
staroffice huray! - but it's not open source (Score:1)
But: it's not open source, so it doesn't qualify. But still, I use it till better stuff arives (kde office keeps sounding wonderful!)
greetings,
Reinout
Bring out your dead! Bring out your dead! (Score:1)
Bring out your dead!
Bring out your dead!
greetings,
Reinout
btw: i use emacs :-)
Re:Statistics (Score:1)
bcboy-linux 238
906 XFree86-Xnest-3.3.3.1-49.i386.rpm
317 XFree86-cyrillic-fonts-3.3.3.1-49.i386.rpm
1294 XFree86-SVGA-3.3.3.1-49.i386.rpm
1108 XFree86-Xvfb-3.3.3.1-49.i386.rpm
851 XFree86-libs-3.3.3.1-49.i386.rpm
237 XFree86-xfs-3.3.3.1-49.i386.rpm
7087 XFree86-3.3.3.1-49.i386.rpm
1255 XFree86-100dpi-fonts-3.3.3.1-49.i386.rpm
1084 XFree86-75dpi-fonts-3.3.3.1-49.i386.rpm
1917 XFree86-devel-3.3.3.1-49.i386.rpm
16056 total
bcboy-linux 239
6250 emacs-20.3-15.i386.rpm
1021 emacs-X11-20.3-15.i386.rpm
5700 emacs-el-20.3-15.i386.rpm
1386 emacs-leim-20.3-15.i386.rpm
914 emacs-nox-20.3-15.i386.rpm
15271 total
bcboy-linux 240
689 vim-X11-5.3-7.i386.rpm
1382 vim-common-5.3-7.i386.rpm
641 vim-enhanced-5.3-7.i386.rpm
249 vim-minimal-5.3-7.i386.rpm
2961 total
... on small systems, emacs is the first thing to go.
There's also the issue that you have to know vi, anyway, if you do much system work: fitting emacs on a recovery disk is not fun. vim gives you advanced features w/o having to use a completely different editor during system recovery, or on space constrained systems.
URL..? (Score:1)
Re:Everyone will say vi or emacs... (Score:1)
Re:Of course it's EMACS silly. (Score:1)
Re:Of course it's EMACS silly. (Score:1)
nano (Score:1)
nano [plattsburgh.edu] - nano's another editor, a GPLed pico clone with a few enhancements.
Editors - vim or vi there is no subsitute (Score:1)
Another full hearted vote for JED! :) (Score:1)
Re:kwrite (Score:1)
Its small fast, does syntax highlighting for nearly everything and is extremely easy to use. The "open recent" feature is really handy. It has everything I need in a code editor.
Kudos to Jochen Wilhelmy (digisnap@cs.tu-berlin.de) for this lovely little editor!
Everyone will say vi or emacs... (Score:1)
/Do a s/(emacs)|(vi)/ed/ on the rest of the discussion, and you do the world a favor
Re:. (Score:1)
If you're stuck in windows, PFE is probably the way to go. Unless you've installed Emacs, of course.
vim for me (Score:1)
I have used emacs (short for Escape-Meta-Alt-Control-Shift) quite a bit but 1) it's modelessness got in the way, at least for me, and 2). it's a kitchen sink editor/email/news/browser/... application and I prefer my applications to be focused on one thing. I know lots of people love emacs and that's AOK with me.
The bottom line is you use what works for you. For me it's vim.
mkg
vim all the way you peasants! (Score:1)
Re:Emacs, obviously (Score:1)
every time you hit enter, you'll get the translation.
oh, to catch capitals you need of course:tr a-zA-Z n-za-mN-ZA-M
greetings, eMBee
--
--
Re:Emacs, obviously (Score:1)
tr a-z n-za-m
greetings, martin.
--
Re:JOE! (Score:1)
vi: not just useful, but fun to watch (Score:1)
It's funny. From time to time one of my students will wander by after school and catch me coding something full-screen in vi, with syntax highlighting. Many of my upper-level students who watch for a minute or two will usually cry out:
Student: Hey! How'd you do that?
Me: (puzzled) What?
Student: Those ten lines just changed indentation level all at once! And you didn't even move!
Me: Yeah, that's vi for you.
Student: vi can do that?
Me: vi can do anything, once you learn how.
You know a text editor is good when people walking by will actually stop to watch you use it. Tom Christiansen was right, vi isn't just an editor, it's a game [slashdot.org] (a "rogue-variant", to quote him more accurately).
And while I'm at it, another thing I like about vi is that I can have it installed on every machine I own and it looks just the same everywhere. Consistency is good, IMO.
Efuns: an Emacs-like editor in Objective Caml (Score:1)
joe... (Score:1)
mond.
Re:. (Score:1)
- You don't see any line numbers.
- You can't search & replace
- There is no hot key for searching, you
always have to go over the menus.
- It can't handle unix mode (LF only) files.
- TABs are always 8 bytes wide.
I can understand if someone wants to express
his l33tness by listing notepad as the favorite
editor, but I don't think anyone actually
uses it for bigger projects cause it's a pain
in the ass.
Emacs runs quite nicely on Windows (although
it seems to have some problems with accessing
files from the network neighbourhood), XEmacs
is unstable as hell on Win32.
Re:Statistics (Score:1)
Problems with pico (Score:1)
--
Patrick Doyle
Gutenberg Printing Press!! (Score:1)
No wacked commands to remember.
Can handle any latin based text.
Any strong man can operate.
All these other wanna-be's don't hold a candle to it!!
Re:JOE! (Score:1)
common enough that (if only in the doze/dos world)
most people don't have to relearn them. It's
powerful enough for programming purposes, yet it
doesn't masquarade as an entire operating system
like some editors. It's small, fast, simple,
and powerful enough for almost all tasks. What more
can you ask for in an editor?
Re:JOE! (Score:1)
think that that tends to be bloatware anyway,
^G tells me if brackets match and the rest tends
to be eye candy. Syntax highlighting has it's
place, it is very useful at times, but it's not
something I need continously. I use emacs when
things just start to get too hairy, but thats
maybe 1ce a year. Joe is lean, simple and usable,
and I there is nothing I can point to and say:
"I'd really like to change...."
Re:Of course it's EMACS silly. (Score:1)
I love vim/vi (don't get me wrong), but I think that "ease of use for newbies" isn't a feature I'd attribute to either vi or emacs. When I want to recommend an editor for someone who's not a heavy UNIXer, I'd more likely recommend something along the lines of Pico -- something that has a smaller command-set and a design that meshes better with the "word processor" mental model that most people have been trained to carry around.
For expert users, emacs and vi are two great tools; as soon as I was comfortable with a modest number of commands in vi I began to see the limitations of Pico, Notepad, and other typically word-processorish programs (which I'd never want to use for wading through code--or through anything else, by now!). Both offer good ways of remembering commands (vi mnemonics, emacs command-names and bindings (sorry, I wish I knew enough Emacs to offer better examples)), and both are customizable enough that you can easily get at all the commands you use most often. For me the deciding factors were the speed of vi and the efficiency of its mnemonics.
(okay, my one semi-OT gripe (I'm sure the Emacs folk could see this one coming): lispmode kinda sucks. Any Vimmers out there got a suggestion on how I can customize things to improve it?)
I concur (Score:1)
Chris Hagar
Re:Emacs, obviously (Score:1)
--
"HORSE."
The one, the only... (Score:1)
--
"HORSE."
Jed! Jed! Jed! (Score:1)
Jed, the programmer's editor [mit.edu], is the best open-source editor. Why?
In case you missed the link above, the homepage is at http://space.mit.edu/~davis/jed.html [mit.edu].
Re:NEdit. Oh an I miss BBEdit. (Score:1)
Outdated modes? What exactly outdated the
command/command-line/text mode? Alt and Ctrl
were *always* available. On the contrary, now
that computers are much faster then humans, having an editor which is fast to use (never move the fingers away from the keyboard) is a much, much bigger advantage.
BTW:
You do know you don't need Motif for NEdit? Lesstif would do quite nicely, thank you very much.
Re:FTE! - got screenshots? (Score:1)
BBedit! (Score:1)
Until I find another editor that shows my perl code's functions in a drop down, I can't switch!
That is, XEmacs (Score:1)
Nothing exceeds like excess!
Re:Editors suck (Score:1)
but personally, I like xfte and code crusader. I also like the DOS edit.com
Re:Emacs is the one true text editor (Score:1)
web with my web browser, use the zshell as interactive shell, tetris to play tetris, *VIM* to edit texts (vi, if vim is not installed)... the list goes on and on.
In other words: For every job I use the best
tools available and not a single mediocre tool for every job. Do you see Formula-one mechanics changing wheels with swiss-army knife like "one-for-everything" tools?
jove (Score:1)
--Brett Glass
The unsung editor... (Score:1)
I came over the DOSland ~ 1995 and just needed a good editor. Slackware included jed, and I was hooked. I -STILL- use it wherever I go, and I keep turning more and more people onto it (and slackware for that matter)
John E Davis did a hell of a job on this one, and the new menuing system is very very cool and useful. I wish more people would realize it's not just an "emacs clone".. it's a lot more powerful.
cast my vote for the unsung editor, JED.
PM.
Re:FTE! - got screenshots? (Score:1)
FTE! (Score:1)
It features color syntax highlighting for C/C++, HTML,PERL, TEX, and many more, multiple file/window editing, column blocks, configurable menus and keyboard bindings, mouse support, undo/redo, regular expression search and replace, folding, as well as background compiler execution.
[Stolen from freshmeat entry-- sue me.]
Visit fte's homepage and give it a try. [uni-lj.si]
Re:JOE! (Score:1)
Re:BBedit! (Score:1)
So switch alread
Emacs is the one true text editor (Score:1)
Nedit: Not too stable for me (Score:1)
i.e.
CTRL-S crashes the program sometimes (This is the shortcut for saving);(
The shortcut keys also dont seem to work with Num-Lock on.
Very annoying.
Stick to PICO.
It works.
Re:Nedit: Not too stable for me (Score:1)
CE (Score:1)
Re:Of course it's EMACS silly. (Score:1)
Well... there's ease of use for newbies, perhaps a smaller memory footprint, a proper GUI, default key bindings which don't cause RSI, and extensibility without having to learn LISP.
The key thing I want from a text editor is the ability to edit text in a nice way, not embedded news readers or psychoanalysis software.
Emacs is very impressive, but I feel the design has been in need of modernisation since window systems made it unnecessary to do everything in one program.
-- Lightstorm.
Re:Too _bad_ it uses Motif?!? (Score:1)
What about Qt? Motif looks positively old fashioned next to Qt. I'd also love to see the extra level of key binding translation used by Motif be removed from nedit (osfPageUp etc).
Nedit is a great editor though, that would be my choice too.
-- Lightstorm.
Notepad [100% OT] (Score:1)
However, I use PICO all the time on my Linux server and love it. Quick, Simple, Fast, Easy.
-BK
Re:vi, what else? (Score:1)
There is Only One (Score:1)
Re:Of course it's EMACS silly. (Score:1)
I can see why people like emacs, but personally, I think it's too bloated for my taste.
vim has syntax highlighting for most any language, auto-indention, and other stuff. I just love using all the vim command mode commands. Like if I mistyped an entire word, I just bcw. Sure, there is something like it, which means that you have to leave the text panel. Esc is an exception, but you use it only when going in to command mode.
I *know* there is a vi workalike for emacs, but I just dont use those featubcwbells and whistles emacs offers me.
vim is what a text editor should have been. it edits text, and it's quick to use.
It's not a text editor with bloat, psychoanalysts, and the kitchen sink. We're just missing a login prompt and a boot loader for emacs to make it a complete operating system.
Remember, that these opinions are my own, and I'm in no way classifying emacs users as idiots. Feel free to be psychoanalysed in your text editor if that's your way of life, and you actually use a millionth of the features.
Re:Jed Kicketh Butteth (Score:1)
Colored highlighting for C on
top of emacs.
Definitley superior to vi.
right on guys!
-Ryan
Re:gEdit (Score:1)
Does noone else use pico (Score:1)
None of the above (Score:1)
For instance, a new editor should be designed from the biggining with a GUI. I'm a huge fan of CLIs, but with text editing GUIs buy you a few nice features: squigly red underlines for mispelled words, pop-up boxes representing choices for automatic completion of member functions etc. Pull-down menus for functions, classes etc.
Most of this stuff should be controlable since I recognize that not everyone wants all this crap cluttering up thier display all the time.
And while I'm on it, it would be nice to see some sort of XML standard that specified basic text editor prefs and syntax highlighting settings. That way, prefs could be more easily transported from one compliant text editor to another. Many text editors are powerful but it's litterally useless if people don't know how to use it. This might help a little.
-gsh
My picks (Score:1)
So these are my votes:
pico -> for quick editing of small or unimportant files which do not require formatting. (eg. most config files)
emacs -> for general coding and editing of large text files
vi -> for when you are introducing new users to *nix systems. It will certainly test their (memory) skills and patience and prove whether or not they are fit to evolve to a higher level of computing beyond MS.
echo "..." >> filename -> great when you really fuck something up on your system and need to regain minimal functionality (ie. setting PATH) without having to type in entire path names to executables. Also good for minimal coding from a rescue disk.
FDE
Re:Nedit: Not too stable for me (Score:1)
Re:Emacs better for Dvorak (Score:2)
[ Note to vi supporters: I'm not so biased that I won't learn vi eventually. I just don't think it will become my editor of choice. Besides, the text editor flame war is always a good hoot. :) ]
Of course it's EMACS silly. (Score:2)
(BTW: That's M-x psychoanalyze-pinhead.)
Statistics (Score:2)
[Note: All tests were performed with the console version of the editor inside an xterm.]
Editor Load Time Memory Usage
--------------------------------
emacs 0.79 s 2800 KB
vim 0.40 s 1400 KB
So, yes, I will concede that Emacs is bigger and slower. But, I'm a LISP freak, and I like being able to tweak the editor in crazy ways without having to recompile it. On the whole, the difference in memory and speed does not matter to me (.39 s per load * 1000 loads per year = 6.5 minutes wasted per year).
Re:Ahhh... you need "pico -w" (Score:2)
Re:Statistics (Score:2)
Re:Of course it's EMACS silly. (Score:2)
Re:JOE! (Score:2)
--
NEdit. Oh an I miss BBEdit. (Score:2)
NEdit is the only editor on Unix which combines all the following characteristics:
Too bad it uses Motif ...
Keith Bostic, nvi (Score:2)
Re:vim ! (Score:2)
Elvis! (Score:2)
Smaller than vim, coolest name, best compatibility, and often seen in laundrymats. Besides which, it is default on Slackware, and nothing more needs saying.
Re:JOE! (Score:2)
Yes, it's WordStarish, but it's easy to learn, and very configurable.
"vi has two modes. One in which it beeps, and one in which it doesn't."
Re:PICO PICO PICO! (Or maybe Star Office?) (Score:2)
Major pico complaint: Wrapping of long lines.
mcedit (Score:2)
F4... ahhh, syntax-highlighting, keys that sort-of coincide with mc keys.
Quick, simple, no macros but I never bothered with that anyway.
Re:vim (Score:2)
All the programmers functionality in a tight package, and compatible with vi.
If you only want to learn an editor once, vim is the way to go.
----
Wind and temp at my house [halcyon.com]
Re:Emacs, obviously (Score:2)
Emacs, obviously (Score:2)
vim ! (Score:2)
~
~
~
~
"submission.html" 12 lines, 723 characters
Pico! (Score:3)
- small
- simple
- useful
- fast
- included. If you've got pine, you've got pico.
I have to at least suggest TECO (Score:3)