| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| whats your text editor |
| Emacs |
|
10% |
[ 6 ] |
| Vim |
|
56% |
[ 32 ] |
| Nano |
|
29% |
[ 17 ] |
| Notepad |
|
3% |
[ 2 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 57 |
|
| Author |
Message |
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1488
Location: U.S.A.
|
 Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2010 8:06 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Sir Alaran wrote: | | BoneKracker wrote: | | Nobody uses SciTE? |
I did until I discovered Textadept. It's kind of like SciTE, but is lua-powered and can be extended to all sorts of fun stuff. I wrote an XML-editing module for it a while back: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSAinGsc7dA |
Looks pretty good. I might have to give it a try.
I like seeing that a project that is actually reducing the number of lines of code over time instead of increasing, even as it is becoming more feature-complete (although lines of code is not a perfect measure of complexity).
Your extension too looks like it must have been a nice piece of work. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
arnvidr
Guru
Joined: 19 Aug 2004
Posts: 453
Location: Oslo, Norway
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2010 9:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
nano, gedit, geany - at work: textpad, eclipse
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yamakuzure
l33t
Joined: 21 Jun 2006
Posts: 951
Location: Bardowick, Germany
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2010 10:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hmmm... scite doesn't look like it could do more than geany or kate (or even kwrite).
_________________
I *do* know that I easily aggravate people due to my condensed writing. Rule of thumb: If I wrote anything that can be understood in two different ways, and one way offends you, then I meant the other!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
juniper
l33t
Joined: 22 Oct 2004
Posts: 756
Location: EU
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2010 10:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| sts wrote: | | I've grown accustomed to using Emacs with Vim key bindings. Not sure where that puts me. |
how do you do that? what are the advantages?
For those who use notepad, nano, pico etc, may I ask why? Personally I use vim and I can see why people use a rich editor like emacs. But nano? it seems to have 0 keybindings and features. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr.Willy
Apprentice
Joined: 15 Jul 2007
Posts: 288
Location: NRW, Germany
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2010 12:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sir Alaran wrote: | | I did until I discovered Textadept. It's kind of like SciTE, but is lua-powered and can be extended to all sorts of fun stuff. I wrote an XML-editing module for it a while back: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSAinGsc7dA |
Actually it looks like a sane version of emacs.
Please tell me theres a CLI for that editor. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1488
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2010 12:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Yamakuzure wrote: | | Hmmm... scite doesn't look like it could do more than geany or kate (or even kwrite). |
No, it can't. But "more" isn't always what you want. If "more" was good, then you'd be using Eclipse to edit BASH scripts and OpenOffice to edit your config files.
SciTE started as a demo of Scintilla, by the Scintilla project. If you want to use Scintilla and want a minimal editor, then SciTE is a good choice.
Somebody who is a KDE user need not hunt around for an editor, because KDE has already made that decision for you (and the KDE editors use Scintilla anyway, I believe).
_________________
Oldthinkers unbellyfeel INGSOC.
-- Headline of a document on Winston Smith's terminal in his cubicle at the Ministry of Truth, seen briefly in the background in one scene of the movie rendition of Nineteen Eighty-Four. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sir Alaran
Apprentice
Joined: 11 Dec 2003
Posts: 182
Location: KSJC
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 11, 2010 12:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Dr.Willy wrote: | | Sir Alaran wrote: | | I did until I discovered Textadept. It's kind of like SciTE, but is lua-powered and can be extended to all sorts of fun stuff. I wrote an XML-editing module for it a while back: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSAinGsc7dA |
Actually it looks like a sane version of emacs.
Please tell me theres a CLI for that editor. |
No. There isn't. It's built off of Scintilla (like SciTE is) and uses GTK.
_________________
D is awesome.
Textadept is my friend. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sts
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 02 Jul 2007
Posts: 97
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 11, 2010 1:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| juniper wrote: | | sts wrote: | | I've grown accustomed to using Emacs with Vim key bindings. Not sure where that puts me. |
how do you do that? what are the advantages? |
The basics are covered by Viper mode and Vimpulse. There's also Emacs Undo Trees for a more vim-esque undo.
I prefer the emacs environment but I believe I can get more done with less typing with the vim style keys. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Crooksey
Apprentice
Joined: 26 Apr 2006
Posts: 236
Location: Vatican City
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 11, 2010 6:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The Earth wrote: | In defense of Emacs, it's comfortable.
I bought the O'Reilly book on Emacs back when I started getting more heavy into my Linux use (I just picked Emacs over vim arbitrarily) and concentrated on learning one good editor. I can use vim, but my hands goto the Emacs buttons naturally.
Also, Zippy, Eliza, & IRC capabilities... Emacs can be ridiculous  |
This Is why I dont like emacs, when you have to buy a book to understand how to use an ediotr. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Muso
l33t
Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 655
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 11, 2010 6:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| juniper wrote: | | For those who use notepad, nano, pico etc, may I ask why? Personally I use vim and I can see why people use a rich editor like emacs. But nano? it seems to have 0 keybindings and features. |
I use nano for tiny files. nano -w /path/to/blah is just simple. For anything large, it sucks... but your ~/.xinitrc? Why not use nano?
_________________
If I had a dollar for every time capitalism was blamed for the problems caused by government, I'd be a fat filmmaker with a baseball cap |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bogamol
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 01 Nov 2009
Posts: 84
Location: Detroit, Michigan - The Home of Rock and Roll
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 11, 2010 6:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
I voted for nano because that's the one I use for editing conf files. I just installed vim and learned how to get it out of "beep a lot" mode. So that's a step in the right direction.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1488
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 11, 2010 8:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The Earth wrote: | | juniper wrote: | | For those who use notepad, nano, pico etc, may I ask why? Personally I use vim and I can see why people use a rich editor like emacs. But nano? it seems to have 0 keybindings and features. |
I use nano for tiny files. nano -w /path/to/blah is just simple. For anything large, it sucks... but your ~/.xinitrc? Why not use nano? |
You know, it has a config file. You don't have to type that "-w".
_________________
Oldthinkers unbellyfeel INGSOC.
-- Headline of a document on Winston Smith's terminal in his cubicle at the Ministry of Truth, seen briefly in the background in one scene of the movie rendition of Nineteen Eighty-Four. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
arnvidr
Guru
Joined: 19 Aug 2004
Posts: 453
Location: Oslo, Norway
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 11, 2010 9:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| juniper wrote: | | For those who use notepad, nano, pico etc, may I ask why? Personally I use vim and I can see why people use a rich editor like emacs. But nano? it seems to have 0 keybindings and features. |
Why? Because I don't use emacs. I don't care to search my brain for the vi commands to do simple stuff (for instance with a configuration file) when I can do it in 2 seconds with nano.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marens
Apprentice
Joined: 05 Aug 2004
Posts: 172
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 11, 2010 10:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| arnvidr wrote: | | juniper wrote: | | For those who use notepad, nano, pico etc, may I ask why? Personally I use vim and I can see why people use a rich editor like emacs. But nano? it seems to have 0 keybindings and features. |
Why? Because I don't use emacs. I don't care to search my brain for the vi commands to do simple stuff (for instance with a configuration file) when I can do it in 2 seconds with nano. |
well to use vim instead of nano you only need to remember three bindings,
i: when you want to insert
esc: when you finished editing
:x: when you want to exit and save
_________________
If English was good enough for Jesus, then it's good enough for you! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vputz
Guru
Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Posts: 308
Location: Oxford, England
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 11, 2010 11:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
Actually, in terms of "simplicity with flexibility", I have tried really really hard to like Wily/Acme. The really simple mouse interface and extensibility makes it like the Scheme of editors. But, like Scheme, I admire it in theory and just can't use it in practicality--instead I turn to the bloated, ungainly, and nevertheless effective Emacs to actually get things done. The Tale of Five Editors bit in The Art of Unix Programming has some nice bits on the subject:
| Quote: | | The comparison between Sam and vi suggests strongly that, at least where editors are concerned, attempts to compromise between the minimalism of ed and the all-singing-all-dancing comprehensiveness of Emacs don't work very well; vi attempts this, and ends up with neither virtue. Instead, it falls into an adhocity trap. Wily avoids the adhocity trap, but cannot match the power of Emacs and must demand a custom process interface from each of its interactive symbionts in order to come anywhere close. |
For a while I tried to replace Vim with Wily/Acme as my "quick editor", but since Wily/Acme need X and don't work in a console environment (and vim is SO useful in a console environment, even for things like using it as a syntax highlighting text pager), it's still Emacs/Vim for me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wildhorse
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 16 Mar 2006
Posts: 148
Location: Estados Unidos De América
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 11, 2010 12:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
WordStar, the CP/M version that was written entirely in Z80 Assembler. Wonderful editor. I used it to write software in Assembler. I had a WordStar keyboard with lots of additional keys for marking and transferring text blocks, searching text etc. That keyboard was as large as a surfboard and more expensive than two cheap PCs today. 3 decades later and I find only shit PC keyboards everywhere.
LSEdit, the Language Sensitive Editor, plus the other tools of the DECSet, all perfectly integrated, including the Source Code Analyzer. The best editor for software development. It was actually written in a specific language for text processing (called TPU) that was also available from the editor itself.
Today: emacs, nano, vi.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1488
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 11, 2010 3:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| marens wrote: | | arnvidr wrote: | | juniper wrote: | | For those who use notepad, nano, pico etc, may I ask why? Personally I use vim and I can see why people use a rich editor like emacs. But nano? it seems to have 0 keybindings and features. |
Why? Because I don't use emacs. I don't care to search my brain for the vi commands to do simple stuff (for instance with a configuration file) when I can do it in 2 seconds with nano. |
well to use vim instead of nano you only need to remember three bindings,
i: when you want to insert
esc: when you finished editing
 : when you want to exit and save |
Great. Then you have a big, fat, complicated program do the same thing as a tiny simple one. Win for Global Warming!
Most people don't know it, but nano does search & replace, syntax highlighting for just about anything, auto-indent, and so-on. There are a few things it won't do (code completion, folding, symbols lookup, etc.). It's well-suited to day-to-day use. It's not something you'd develop software on.
Some people find vim or Emacs usable for major projects; some people find that they're not. I think it boils down to whether you prefer graphical features in your programming environment, such as a graphical debugger front-end, graphical symbol browser, etc.. If you want a graphical debugging front-end, about the best you can do without resorting to an IDE is "the GUD" in Emacs, or on on vim, a curses/slang front-end (e.g. cgdb). If you're going to resort to an X-based front-end like ddd, then you might as well use an IDE so it's well-integrated in terms of workflow, shares libraries and so on. The other problem is that it takes some work to configure vim or emacs to be a complete coding environment, and that's inconvenient if you are working on multiple machines.
If you don't want an IDE, and vim or emacs is the most powerful coding tool you need, then yes, you might as well use it as the only editor on your system. For those who are actually going to use an IDE for their serious coding work, then it makes sense to have a more minimal editor on the system for general use. As minimal editors go, nano is a pretty good choice. It is small, clean, highly capable for its size, and it happens to be the standard editor (like vi used to be) on many linux distros.
Bottom line: if vim or emacs is all you need and suits your purposes well, then so be it. But don't feel like you're superior to someone who uses something like nano, or joe, because that may well be because they're using other tools (like an IDE) for their heavy lifting. Meanwhile, you may be the one unnecessarily firing up your bloated-ass programming environment just to edit a config file.
_________________
Oldthinkers unbellyfeel INGSOC.
-- Headline of a document on Winston Smith's terminal in his cubicle at the Ministry of Truth, seen briefly in the background in one scene of the movie rendition of Nineteen Eighty-Four. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr.Willy
Apprentice
Joined: 15 Jul 2007
Posts: 288
Location: NRW, Germany
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 11, 2010 7:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sir Alaran wrote: | | Dr.Willy wrote: | | Sir Alaran wrote: | | I did until I discovered Textadept. It's kind of like SciTE, but is lua-powered and can be extended to all sorts of fun stuff. I wrote an XML-editing module for it a while back: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSAinGsc7dA |
Actually it looks like a sane version of emacs.
Please tell me theres a CLI for that editor. |
No. There isn't. It's built off of Scintilla (like SciTE is) and uses GTK. |
What a pity.
I really ask myself why; why do people write editors with GTK or Qt or whatever frontends?
Especially if it's such a lightwight editor like Textadept. There are no buttons to click on, no pictures to show an no ... other things that don't belong in an editor. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HyperQuantum
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 27 Sep 2005
Posts: 88
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 12, 2010 1:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I use nano for editing config files when using the command-line as root. For other things I use SciTE (even though I'm running KDE). At work I've installed SciTE as well; Notepad is way too primitive (it cannot even correctly display a text file that uses Unix line endings  ).
Anybody got an ebuild for Textadept? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
petrjanda
Veteran
Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 1557
Location: Brno, Czech Republic
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 12, 2010 1:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
For just typing a text file? nano
For programming: KDevelop but fallback to nano if I dont have it.
_________________
There is, a not-born, a not-become, a not-made, a not-compounded. If that unborn, not-become, not-made, not-compounded were not, there would be no escape from this here that is born, become, made and compounded. - Gautama Siddharta |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
avx
Advocate
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 2063
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 13, 2010 1:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Dr.Willy wrote: |
What a pity.
I really ask myself why; why do people write editors with GTK or Qt or whatever frontends?
Especially if it's such a lightwight editor like Textadept. There are no buttons to click on, no pictures to show an no ... other things that don't belong in an editor. |
qft  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1488
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 13, 2010 1:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| avx wrote: | | Dr.Willy wrote: |
What a pity.
I really ask myself why; why do people write editors with GTK or Qt or whatever frontends?
Especially if it's such a lightwight editor like Textadept. There are no buttons to click on, no pictures to show an no ... other things that don't belong in an editor. |
qft |
Because most people are not smart enough to be able to configure a proper terminal emulator (such as urxvtd) in such a way that it looks good, has sharp, properly-sized fonts, and so on. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
avx
Advocate
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 2063
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 13, 2010 5:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Because most people are not smart enough to be able to configure a proper terminal emulator (such as urxvtd) in such a way that it looks good, has sharp, properly-sized fonts, and so on. |
But people willing to use such an editor certainly smart enough or at least willing to read the needed docs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zixnub
n00b
Joined: 27 Dec 2007
Posts: 64
Location: Brasschaat, Belgium
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mardok45
n00b
Joined: 21 Jun 2008
Posts: 54
Location: Right behind you
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 14, 2010 1:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
While we're on the subject, does anyone know if there's any plugins for Vim that has a drop-down/code completion feature, like Visual C++/Eclipse?
The only thing I miss while using Vim is code completion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Off the Wall
