|
RE (tilly) 1: Code Editor
by tilly (Archbishop) on Sep 28, 2000 at 06:30 UTC
|
Well actually I use vi a lot. Or vim.
But if you want the features which I don't care about, you
can always run Emacs. Most of the features that you like in
UltraEdit derive from Emacs.
For Perl syntax in particular I think that the
Perl mode
created by Ilya is likely to be more accurate than what you
get in UltraEdit... | [reply] |
(dchetlin: use ed!) RE: Code Editor
by dchetlin (Friar) on Sep 28, 2000 at 06:29 UTC
|
You don't need a fancy HTML editor. You don't need syntax coloring. These are all crutches of the incompetent. Who needs a visual, multi-line editor? Use ed! Ed is the standard text editor!
In all seriousness, I use vim, which does do syntax highlighting and satisfies my needs. Of course, what use is syntax highlighting anyways when only perl can parse Perl?
-dlc | [reply] |
RE: Code Editor
by chromatic (Archbishop) on Sep 28, 2000 at 07:16 UTC
|
I use vim on Linux and also on NT, on those occasions when I need to use NT.
I don't use syntax highlighting, as it just distracts me. The one thing I really do like about vim, though, is the % key in command mode. It takes you to the corresponding brace.
Sometimes it breaks in complex regular expressions, but it's just so handy it's one of the things I can't imagine not having anymore. | [reply] |
RE: Code Editor
by johannz (Hermit) on Sep 28, 2000 at 21:06 UTC
|
Having been on both platforms (windows and *nix) I used a bunch of editors over the last 4 yrs. Here's thoughts and opinions on both
- Windows
- Programmer File Editor
Not much current development. I started out with this program before moving on to editors with more features.
- Archnophilia
Good program, fallen a bit behind on features compared to more current editors. Good for HTML editing
- UltraEdit
Used to use it. I have since converted to NotePad+ and gvim. Syntax Highlighting and ability to add commands to the menu bar make it useful for development.
- Notepad+
My standard replacement for notepad. All the features of regular notepad, with no file size limits and someother nicities. I like it because I can install it and even Microsoft apps will use it.
- GVim
Graphical Vim - What more can you say :-)
- *nix
- GVim
And I can use the same program on both OS'es :-)
- NEdit (Nirvana Editor)
Nice windows-style gui. Very comfortable for converts from windows or individuals who regularly work in both OS'es. Has syntax highlighting, macro programming, and other nice features for use as a programmer's editor.
| [reply] |
RE: Code Editor
by davorg (Chancellor) on Sep 28, 2000 at 12:19 UTC
|
On both Windows and Unix I use Xemacs for all types of
editing - whether it's code, mark-up or documentation. You
can get it from http://www.xemacs.org.
Oh... and I'm a little confused by your request for
"a good html Editor, like (...) front page". I don't know
what it is that Front Page creates, but it sure ain't
HTML!
--
<http://www.dave.org.uk>
European Perl Conference - Sept 22/24 2000, ICA, London
<http://www.yapc.org/Europe/>
| [reply] |
RE: Code Editor
by doran (Deacon) on Sep 28, 2000 at 08:01 UTC
|
In Windows, I use Homesite, since I learned HTML before perl
and Homesite is a terrific editor. It recognizes perl (via
the filename's extention) and highlights accordingly.
For Linux, in a X environment, I like Glimmer the best so far.
http://glimmer.sourceforge.net/
The KDE advanced editor is also ok.
Cooledit is also another one worth looking at. I don't like
it as much as Glimmer, but it shows promise.
http://cooledit.sourceforge.net/
Good luck -db
| [reply] |
RE: Code Editor
by fred (Acolyte) on Sep 28, 2000 at 18:23 UTC
|
The two major factions are emacs and vi, or more generally xemacs and vim. Both are very powerful editors, with syntax highlighting and all sorts of other features.
Neither, however, is easy to use. You have to learn all sorts of keystrokes to make it do what you want. Then, after a year or so of using it, you wonder how you ever lived without it.
Seriously, spend the time to learn one of those two, and it will pay off dramatically through convenience and productivity.
| [reply] |
|
|
| [reply] |
RE: Code Editor
by jptxs (Curate) on Sep 28, 2000 at 08:30 UTC
|
on linux it's VIM all the way
for windows check out Textpad. It doesn't do syntax highlight, but has a warm start feature i've grown to love. basically, it will save the set of files i'm working on so i can shutdown and next time i start it up it pulls up all the files i was working with with all their clipboards and undo histories intact.
-- I'm a solipsist, and so is everyone else. (think about it)
| [reply] |
|
|
i use vim on linux and textpad on windows
and textpad DOES do syntax highlighting
you just have to create it
fairly simple just look for it
| [reply] |
|
|
i guess you're right. just found it...but i hate syntax editing. i never looked for it and therefore never knew it was there. also, i use an older version 3.2.5; maybe it's more apparent in the newer ones?
:)
-- I'm a solipsist, and so is everyone else. (think about it)
| [reply] |
|
|
|
|
Wrong, it does syntax hilighting. Check out the syntax files and configure the prefences.
But i'm a vim guy all the way. Love the rc file. Here I can configure nice shortcuts that fit my profile.
--
My opinions may have changed,
but not the fact that I am right
| [reply] |
RE: Code Editor
by Jouke (Curate) on Sep 28, 2000 at 12:34 UTC
|
In windows, there's nothing like UltraEdit. Fully configurable, expandable, and fast.
In Linux I use Nedit. It's UltraEdit and then better and more :)
Jouke Visser, Perl 'Adept'
| [reply] |
RE: Code Editor
by neophyte (Curate) on Sep 28, 2000 at 11:08 UTC
|
Using 2 OSs, I tried a variety of editors:
On my Win32-Systems I use
-
Proton (german part of that webpage)
because of its command-line.
I like being able to start the debugger or syntax-check directly from the editor.
-
a simple notepad - replacement as standard editor
On Linux I tend to use jed (its just simple to use). neophyte
Update:
Coming from the Dos/Win world, vi/vim seem pretty complicated to me. But I have started looking at it (which always means that I'm picking something up). | [reply] |
RE: Code Editor
by geektron (Curate) on Sep 28, 2000 at 12:34 UTC
|
i just use good old-fashioned vi. not vim, definitely not emacs. vi.
clean, simple, fast. i can edit my own code. :) | [reply] |
RE: Code Editor
by clemburg (Curate) on Sep 30, 2000 at 16:00 UTC
|
If platform independence is something you care about,
go for either a decent vi clone like vim (with gvim attached),
or emacs/xemacs.
I use Emacs with the viper mode (vi emulator mode), so I get
the best of both worlds - vi keybindings for compatibility
with even the oldest environments around, and guaranteed availability
of a decent editor that I know by heart everywhere (vi is a POSIX standard),
and Emacs for the IDE features and general integration with
versioning systems like CVS, and all the other stuff.
BTW,
Emacs works very well on Win32 systems, too.
For me, the biggest point in choosing an editor is making
a decision that will make my "editing reflexes" work everywhere.
So, in reality we are not talking software here, but ergonomy or usability, and
availability on different platforms.
Currently, only the vi user interface will be able to meet this requirement,
as it is installed by default nearly everywhere, and it is a supported standard,
so there are "official" versions of it for all the different platforms.
This can mean a lot in the real world, where you simply won't be allowed
to install your stuff - but the work needs to be done anyhow, in a lonely
server room with a lot of stone-age boxen with tight security.
Christian Lemburg
Brainbench MVP for Perl
http://www.brainbench.com
| [reply] |
RE: Code Editor
by Jonathan (Curate) on Sep 28, 2000 at 19:02 UTC
|
I would discourage VIM and EMACS as they are not on every *NIX box. It was only a couple of years ago I was working on a site where vanilla VI was the only option and editing on some old vt100's - No cursor keys and no escape key :-)
Real men use VI with h,j,k,l and ^[ for Esc.
Moving your hands to Esc and the Cursor keys interferes with touch typing.
"We are all prompted by the same motives, all deceived by the same fallacies, all animated by hope, obstructed by danger, entangled by desire, and seduced by pleasure."
- Samuel Johnson | [reply] |
|
|
actully vim supports all of the standard vi key mappings
| [reply] |
RE: Code Editor
by OzzyOsbourne (Chaplain) on Sep 28, 2000 at 22:38 UTC
|
Notepad. No frills, but full control. I even use it for HTML. If I find myself stuck so badly that I need to see syntax coloring, I usually bang my head on the desk 3-4 times (your number of repetitions may vary) really hard.
And at times, I am guilty of using SynEdit to count lines for me... | [reply] |
|
|
I had to switch to wordpad since some of my html got too big.
I just rub my eyes real heard for syntax highlighting.
The keys were starting to leave real dents on my forehead.
--
$you = new YOU;
honk() if $you->love(perl)
| [reply] |
|
|
You might want to check out Notepad+
which is a drop-in replacement for Windows Notepad. It is very simple,
suffers not from file size limits, allows multiple files, and some other
simple but useful improvements. I like it because it easily
fits on a floppy so I can bring a decent editor to other
machines when I need to.
Unfortunately, the author lost the source several years ago,
and so nothing has happened since 1996, but it is solid and
functional as is.
I just wish it had a % command! I'm going to check out VIM
again as it's been a long time...
| [reply] |
RE: Code Editor
by 2501 (Pilgrim) on Sep 28, 2000 at 08:56 UTC
|
hehe...I think the *ix standard has pretty much been set as vim, but I too am sort of curious about PC editors. Right now I use Context, which I picked up from download.com
I like the fact that I can have tabs of multiple files open at once, including an output file, which updates live inside Context. It is kind of creepy. | [reply] |
RE: Code Editor
by Anonymous Monk on Sep 28, 2000 at 20:15 UTC
|
For syntax highlighting I tend to use VIM (VI iMproved).
It comes with most distributions of Linux and handles many languages avilable today.
If you are using XWindows then I would suggest trying XEmacs. It is a very easy editor to get used to for a Microsoft/Mac user. Regular Emacs (command line/terminal based) is beyond my comprehension, which is why I use VIM for text only work.
For HTML work I just use a text editor. I have to wisdom for WYSIWYG editors and HTML. | [reply] |
RE: Code Editor
by AgentM (Curate) on Sep 28, 2000 at 08:05 UTC
|
Hmm. What ever happened to those happy days of emacs vs. vi? Emacs certainly has all of the features you mentioned, as does vi. But just to answer the question, I enjoy using BBEdit 5.1 because it has the compiler (C/C++) and parser (MacPerl) connectivity built right in. | [reply] |
RE: Code Editor
by Maclir (Curate) on Sep 28, 2000 at 20:25 UTC
|
For HTML writing on Windows, I use Arachnophilia (sorry, no link, not on my normal PC). There is another windows product called "Synedit". Suffers from bad memory leaks tho.
On *nix (mainly solaris), I use vi.
| [reply] |
|
|
Just wanted to add the link to arachnophilia. Definitely an editor worth looking at, when you're working on Win32-Systems. It recognizes perl files from the .pl extension and does syntax-coloring if you want it to.
neophyte
| [reply] |
RE: Code Editor
by Anonymous Monk on Oct 19, 2000 at 22:55 UTC
|
Assuming this is a serious question...
Emacs is *the* text editor. It's at least 50% of the reason
I prefer UNIX anyway.
Syntax highlighting, of course.
I'll let you discover the rest yourself. Just start looking. | [reply] |
RE: Code Editor
by FiReWaLL (Scribe) on Sep 29, 2000 at 18:54 UTC
|
Thank you all this is my last post using Internet Explorer, the next post I'll use Netscape for Linux.
I'm formatting my computer in the next 2 hours, and I'll install Linux, and VIM, surelly, and maybe soon, I can also say what I thought about it.
-------
[]'s
FiReWaLL
The only thing you regret in life, is the risk you don't take.
| [reply] |
|
|
Excellent choice. maybe as an objective tester, you could resolve the emacs vs. vi problem. ONE MUST FALL!!! :-)
| [reply] |
RE: Code Editor
by fred (Acolyte) on Sep 28, 2000 at 18:24 UTC
|
| [reply] |
