in reply to Re: Re: Text Editors
in thread Text Editors

I'm sure Abigail-II isn't kidding. I'm a serious programmer and I've never heard of this Kate thing. But I also never use KDE or Gnome or any of those other fancy *nix gui things. My development is split between a Windows 2000 machine with putty (and then I use emacs) or Domino Designer which is from an entirely different world. So all of my text-based programming is done entirely to a console using emacs. It works great and I never have to deal with ugly library messes either.

Added: I also find it useful to have a local win32 copy of emacs and use that as well. That it happens to be in a gui doesn't mean that I treat it differently than my normal console-only emacs session.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Text Editors
by allolex (Curate) on Jul 09, 2003 at 20:40 UTC

    An educational gap, I'm sure ;) ("Bildungslücke" for castaway ;) ). Most people who use Kate use KDE, although it works on (almost?) all QT platforms, like my Zaurus PDA (tinykate), I recommended it once here on PM, where I talked about it's cool support of a graphical regex editor for KDE. I guess I'll forgive you and Abigail-II for not having read or remembered my post, but just this once :)

    Kate is really nice for normal editing, but I need cross-platform support, so vim is my editor of choice for that reason.

    Graphical editors in general encourage the use of the mouse, which tends to slow people down. If you type really slowly anyway, then I sincerely recommend a graphical editor with syntax highlighting. :)

    --
    Allolex

[reply]

      Yeah... I guess. There's a lot of convenience in not having to set up X to forward just so I can use a GUI editor. I suppose its because text based is a lowest-common-denominator that happens to work really, really well. I'd have to actually work to get that thing running. I'm sure its cool though.

[reply]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Text Editors
by Anonymous Monk on Jul 09, 2003 at 19:03 UTC

    Hmmmm....

    1. I'm a serious programmer
    2. I've never heard of this Kate thing.
    3. I also never use KDE or Gnome or any of those other fancy *nix gui things
    4. development is split between a Windows 2000 machine with putty

    Riiiight.

    I've also found that anyone who states that they're a "serious programmer" either has no idea what they're talking about or doesn't possess the flexibility to switch between emerging technologies and gets stuck in a single frame of mind. At the very best it sounds rather pretentious and insecure.

[reply]

      I also never heard of Kate.

      As for KDE and Gnome, I avoid them for the same reason I avoid emacs. Too bloated. I'm happy with vtwm, thanks.

      Finally, I'm a downright silly programmer, so all that pop psychology crap about insecurity just doesn't apply to me, I guess. ;-)

      -sauoq
"My two cents aren't worth a dime.";
[reply]

      Oh c'mon. I've never actually used the phrase "serious programmer" (except for just now, that is). It just happened to fit from the conversation - as if I couldn't do real work without knowing about Kate and using KDE. Or by using a GUI text editor.

      My insecurities and pretensions on the other hand... well this isn't the place for getting into that.

      Update notes: I added the parenthetical comment (except for just now, that is)

[reply]

In Section Meditations