Hey,
We touched on this briefly last night after the question was asked about the best Linux replacement for UltraEdit, but we didn't really get into it as we were all getting ready to stuff ourselves with Hoi Sin sauce.
I thought it'd make an interesting thread. So, suggestions for favourite editors.
Without getting into a flame war between vi and emacs ... what editor do you prefer for light-weight editing? i.e. not a full IDE like eclipse or KDevelop, but just for the little jobs of editing small text files.
I use nano on my very old gentoo box, which is a nice console based editor that is more user friendly than vi/emacs (tho, naturally, less feature rich). I generally rely on vi for console-based editing on other machines.
As for the GUI-based ones, I tried gVim but just found it too much hard work. I have run Crimson Editor under WINE for a while because it has lots more features than Kate or KWrite. I'll accept that Crimson Editor is somewhat stagnant (the replacement Emerald Editor appears to be stuck in development hell) and Notepad++ under WINE might be a better choice, but I haven't taken the time to play with it properly.
So, anyone got any other favourites worth trying? Does anyone know of a native Linux GUI app that can compete with UltraEdit et al?
Peter.
samwise wrote:
Hey,
We touched on this briefly last night after the question was asked about the best Linux replacement for UltraEdit, but we didn't really get into it as we were all getting ready to stuff ourselves with Hoi Sin sauce.
I thought it'd make an interesting thread. So, suggestions for favourite editors.
Without getting into a flame war between vi and emacs ... what editor do you prefer for light-weight editing? i.e. not a full IDE like eclipse or KDevelop, but just for the little jobs of editing small text files.
I use nano on my very old gentoo box, which is a nice console based editor that is more user friendly than vi/emacs (tho, naturally, less feature rich). I generally rely on vi for console-based editing on other machines.
As for the GUI-based ones, I tried gVim but just found it too much hard work. I have run Crimson Editor under WINE for a while because it has lots more features than Kate or KWrite. I'll accept that Crimson Editor is somewhat stagnant (the replacement Emerald Editor appears to be stuck in development hell) and Notepad++ under WINE might be a better choice, but I haven't taken the time to play with it properly.
So, anyone got any other favourites worth trying? Does anyone know of a native Linux GUI app that can compete with UltraEdit et al?
Peter.
Geany
Ian
Erm, Openoffice.org! Nah... definitely nano++ (or pico of course, whichever is installed.) but normally gedit to be honest, only because it does what I need and I'm too lazy to bother installing anything else...
Notepad++ is good, got it on my USB stick for use on Windows machines. Obviously miles better than Notepad.exe ;)
-Si
Ah, Geany looks like it's worth a whirl ...
Si, is nano++ different to nano? Can't find any mention of a ++ version after a quick google ...
Peter.
On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 11:10:12AM +0000, samwise wrote:
Ah, Geany looks like it's worth a whirl ...
Si, is nano++ different to nano? Can't find any mention of a ++ version after a quick google ...
Rather than meaning "nano"++, he was indicating a vote for the use of nano ;)
On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 11:00:11AM +0000, Simon Elliott wrote:
Erm, Openoffice.org! Nah... definitely nano++ (or pico of course, whichever is installed.) but normally gedit to be honest, only because it does what I need and I'm too lazy to bother installing anything else...
ISTR pico is non-free (hence the existance of nano), well, more that it's got a funky licence along with pine that makes distribution a pain. I'm assuming that you've hit it due to UEA's student access machines being about 73 million years out of date (note: maybe a slight exaggeration ;)
Notepad++ is good, got it on my USB stick for use on Windows machines. Obviously miles better than Notepad.exe ;)
I get round the problem of windows machines in a much easier way - I don't use 'em ;) And, if I am, then I probably want to edit something that I'm going to want elsewhere anyways - so I'll have ssh and vim open :)
Cheers,
On 18 Dec 2007, at 11:20 am, Brett Parker wrote:
Notepad++ is good, got it on my USB stick for use on Windows machines. Obviously miles better than Notepad.exe ;)
I get round the problem of windows machines in a much easier way - I don't use 'em ;) And, if I am, then I probably want to edit something that I'm going to want elsewhere anyways - so I'll have ssh and vim open :)
It should of course be pointed out that you can run GVim on Windows too.
On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 11:27:33AM +0000, David Reynolds wrote:
On 18 Dec 2007, at 11:20 am, Brett Parker wrote:
Notepad++ is good, got it on my USB stick for use on Windows machines. Obviously miles better than Notepad.exe ;)
I get round the problem of windows machines in a much easier way - I don't use 'em ;) And, if I am, then I probably want to edit something that I'm going to want elsewhere anyways - so I'll have ssh and vim open :)
It should of course be pointed out that you can run GVim on Windows too.
If we're going that far, we might as well point out that you can install cygwin in windows and install the console version of vim... or nano... or joe... or all of 'em... ;)
On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 10:47:43AM +0000, samwise wrote:
Hey,
We touched on this briefly last night after the question was asked about the best Linux replacement for UltraEdit, but we didn't really get into it as we were all getting ready to stuff ourselves with Hoi Sin sauce.
I thought it'd make an interesting thread. So, suggestions for favourite editors.
Without getting into a flame war between vi and emacs ... what editor do you prefer for light-weight editing? i.e. not a full IDE like eclipse or KDevelop, but just for the little jobs of editing small text files.
I use a vi clone called vile for *everything*, it's not that different from vim but I have got used to it over the years (I first started using it on Solaris) so I have stuck with it.
A *big* advantage for me is that at work I very often log in to test systems and customer systems that only have 'real' vi available so I don't have to re-learn the editor there.
I use nano on my very old gentoo box, which is a nice console based editor that is more user friendly than vi/emacs (tho, naturally, less feature rich). I generally rely on vi for console-based editing on other machines.
Seems odd to me that using two different editors can be 'easier' than knowing one (possibly more complex) one in depth.
As for the GUI-based ones, I tried gVim but just found it too much hard work.
I use the GUI vile which is called xvile. Again I don't see the problem, xvile is just the same as vile with a few GUI addons like mouse awareness etc. Just using the same editor *everywhere* means that it's never 'hard work'.
I have run Crimson Editor under WINE for a while because ithas lots more features than Kate or KWrite. I'll accept that Crimson Editor is somewhat stagnant (the replacement Emerald Editor appears to be stuck in development hell) and Notepad++ under WINE might be a better choice, but I haven't taken the time to play with it properly.
So, anyone got any other favourites worth trying? Does anyone know of a native Linux GUI app that can compete with UltraEdit et al?
I still think my philosophy of using the same editor *everywhere* is the best approach. You need to choose one that's available on every platform you use of course, that's what led me to vile/xvile. I use it in all the following situations:-
At work as my programming editor, Solaris with a Config management system that launches the editor via a gnuclient type mechanism (my original reason for choosing xvile, a vi clone that worked in server mode).
As my mail editor, I use mutt for mail and thus can choose what editor I use for writing mail.
As my newsgroup posting editor, I use tin and, like mutt it uses whatever editor I specify.
For all my editing of scripts, python, pearl, etc. on Linux. Vile has syntax colouring for just about every language you can think of and quite a few that you can't!
For editing textareas in Firefox, this is done via a neat little extension called mozex. Whenever a textarea asks for input I can hit CTRL/E and the contents of the textarea can be edited using my favourite editor!
On Windows I have the windows version of vile which is called winvile so even there I can feel at home (and avoid notepad!).
Nowadays I could probably replace most of the above by using vim/gvim and starting now I probably would. I'm not sure if there's a server mode in gvim though.
A *big* advantage for me is that at work I very often log in to test systems and customer systems that only have 'real' vi available so I don't have to re-learn the editor there.
Indeed, knowing the fundamentals of vi is essential for anyone using a *nix alike OS.
Seems odd to me that using two different editors can be 'easier' than knowing one (possibly more complex) one in depth.
I use nano solely because that's what came out of the box with my gentoo install - and it's very easy to use. If it wasn't for the fact that vi is just everywhere - it'd be a good candidate for my fave console editor. Joe is also quite easy to use too.
I use the GUI vile which is called xvile. Again I don't see the problem, xvile is just the same as vile with a few GUI addons like mouse awareness etc. Just using the same editor *everywhere* means that it's never 'hard work'.
Picking up and remembering the shortcuts, *is* the hard work. and something like Gvim doesn't make that much easier, as you say - it's pretty much just vi with addons.
I still think my philosophy of using the same editor *everywhere* is the best approach. You need to choose one that's available on every platform you use of course, that's what led me to vile/xvile. I use it in all the following situations:-
I'm glad that works for you - but using a GUI editor you can drag things around, compare docs side by side and use diff features etc. which can be more productive than just plain ol' vi. One size doesn't always fit all!
Nowadays I could probably replace most of the above by using vim/gvim and starting now I probably would. I'm not sure if there's a server mode in gvim though.
Yes, I think the vi clones would probably be the most portable and functional options if I was going to restrict myself to one family ... but there's still something to be said for the feel of a nice GUI one on my main desktop.
I am going to give Geany a whirl, I think - it feels quite nice on first impressions.
Peter.
Thanks everyone.
Loads of new ones I'd not heard of, to try there. I forget who was looking for the UltraEdit clone in the first place (Mike?) last night, but I'm sure they'll be able to find something to suit!
Peter.
On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 04:05:46PM +0000, samwise wrote:
I still think my philosophy of using the same editor *everywhere* is the best approach. You need to choose one that's available on every platform you use of course, that's what led me to vile/xvile. I use it in all the following situations:-
I'm glad that works for you - but using a GUI editor you can drag things around, compare docs side by side and use diff features etc. which can be more productive than just plain ol' vi. One size doesn't always fit all!
Absolutely agree. However the gui version of vile (that's xvile) can drag things around and things like that. One of its most useful features is being able to cut and past rectangular regions.
samwise samwise@bagshot-row.org wrote:
A *big* advantage for me is that at work I very often log in to test systems and customer systems that only have 'real' vi available so I don't have to re-learn the editor there.
Indeed, knowing the fundamentals of vi is essential for anyone using a *nix alike OS. [...]
Why? ed is available everywhere that vi is and then some. Also, busybox's ed is more like real ed than vi is like commonly-installed vi.
By the way:-
"The name POSIX was suggested by Richard Stallman." POSIX 1003.1 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ Version 1.12) http://www.opengroup.org/austin/papers/posix_faq.html.
Funny what you spot.
Indeed, knowing the fundamentals of vi is essential for anyone using a *nix alike OS. [...]
Why? ed is available everywhere that vi is and then some. Also, busybox's ed is more like real ed than vi is like commonly-installed vi.
Why? So that one can participate in vi vs. emacs flame wars, of course! :)
Peter.
samwise wrote:
I'm glad that works for you - but using a GUI editor you can drag things around, compare docs side by side and use diff features etc. which can be more productive than just plain ol' vi. One size doesn't always fit all!
gvimdiff for side-by-side, coloured diffs.
Currently have my default setup editing from a url scp://me@mybox.co.uk/var/www/wibble.html Does RCS ci+co on all writes and syntax checks code prior to upload. + scriptable from ruby-> ESC:rubydo $_=$_.reverse + datamunging with dbext-> ESC:Select * from lusers where clue>'0'
** Chris G cl@isbd.net [2007-12-18 11:46]:
On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 10:47:43AM +0000, samwise wrote:
<<snip>>
I still think my philosophy of using the same editor *everywhere* is the best approach. You need to choose one that's available on every platform you use of course, that's what led me to vile/xvile. I use it in all the following situations:-
At work as my programming editor, Solaris with a Config management system that launches the editor via a gnuclient type mechanism (my original reason for choosing xvile, a vi clone that worked in server mode). As my mail editor, I use mutt for mail and thus can choose what editor I use for writing mail. As my newsgroup posting editor, I use tin and, like mutt it uses whatever editor I specify. For all my editing of scripts, python, pearl, etc. on Linux. Vile has syntax colouring for just about every language you can think of and quite a few that you can't! For editing textareas in Firefox, this is done via a neat little extension called mozex. Whenever a textarea asks for input I can hit CTRL/E and the contents of the textarea can be edited using my favourite editor! On Windows I have the windows version of vile which is called winvile so even there I can feel at home (and avoid notepad!).Nowadays I could probably replace most of the above by using vim/gvim and starting now I probably would. I'm not sure if there's a server mode in gvim though.
** end quote [Chris G]
Yay, thanks for that pointer to the Firefox extension, I'm off to install it now :) The number of times I end up with strange characters in text I'm editing in a web input for is no odds to anyone. Using a Windows/GUI editor is, for me anyway, such a slow and cumbersome way of working because my hand is forever heading off to the mouse, or shifting down to the cursor keys, to get at various functions.
As you may guess I'm a Vi(m) fan and have been pretty much since I started using Linux. I did toy with Pico briefly when I used Red Hat as it was the default with Pine which I was given to work with. I looked at Mutt, but Pine was easier to get into. When I switched to Debian I decided to explore Mutt a bit more and I'm glad I did. Pine/Pico/Nano are such a pain to use now, and Mutt/Vim are, again for me, much quicker and easier to work with than Pine/Pico ever were.
A quick pointer on the Windows side of things. I have used GVim, but never quite got on with it for some odd reason. I generally use NoteTab Light [1] on Windows. It can handle the differences between Windows and *nix text files, and has a few nice features for stripping HTML tags, tidying spacing, etc., which is generally all I ever do in Windows - get all the Windows cruft tidied ready for work in a decent OS and editor :) I could probably script something, or work out something similar in Vim, but it is actually easier to use the Windows tool to do this!
One day I'll try Emacs, because it would be nice to actually be able to compare it to Vim properly. All I ever do is fire it up and then find I can't do anything, even get out, so I kill the process. I can never remember the exit incantation! With Vi I had a short crib sheet for the basics that got me going in minutes. I should really find one for Emacs before I next fire it up!
On Wed, Dec 19, 2007 at 12:17:10PM +0000, Paul Tansom wrote:
Yay, thanks for that pointer to the Firefox extension, I'm off to install it now :) The number of times I end up with strange characters in text I'm editing in a web input for is no odds to anyone. Using a Windows/GUI editor is, for me anyway, such a slow and cumbersome way of working because my hand is forever heading off to the mouse, or shifting down to the cursor keys, to get at various functions.
It's a godsend! My usual mistake is to hit the escape key and lose everything!
[snip]
One day I'll try Emacs, because it would be nice to actually be able to compare it to Vim properly. All I ever do is fire it up and then find I can't do anything, even get out, so I kill the process. I can never remember the exit incantation! With Vi I had a short crib sheet for the basics that got me going in minutes. I should really find one for Emacs before I next fire it up!
Vile/Xvile is actually based on microemacs so 'under the hood' it's quite Emacs-like. It can use perl as an extension language.
On 18 Dec 2007, at 10:47 am, samwise wrote:
So, anyone got any other favourites worth trying? Does anyone know of a native Linux GUI app that can compete with UltraEdit et al?
I used to use Scite [1] on Windows in the days before Crimson Editor which was pretty good and also runs on Linux.
I now use Textmate [2] which is *fantastic* but a Mac-only application sadly.
[1] - http://scintilla.org/SciTE.html [2] - http://www.macromates.com/
shell io redirects, pipes, echo, cat & sed. Who could possibly need more than that?
Adam
On 18-Dec-07 11:11:26, Adam Bower wrote:
shell io redirects, pipes, echo, cat & sed. Who could possibly need more than that?
Adam
which cat sed dig vim ?
true
less done in emacs joe /etc
-------------------------------------------------------------------- E-Mail: (Ted Harding) Ted.Harding@manchester.ac.uk Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 094 0861 Date: 18-Dec-07 Time: 12:03:52 ------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------
On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 10:47:43AM +0000, samwise wrote:
Hey,
We touched on this briefly last night after the question was asked about the best Linux replacement for UltraEdit, but we didn't really get into it as we were all getting ready to stuff ourselves with Hoi Sin sauce.
I thought it'd make an interesting thread. So, suggestions for favourite editors.
Without getting into a flame war between vi and emacs ... what editor do you prefer for light-weight editing? i.e. not a full IDE like eclipse or KDevelop, but just for the little jobs of editing small text files.
I use vim fairly much for everything (including composing this mail, ahh for being able to use a sensible editor in your mail client), light or heavy wieght, I find that using the same editor everywhere means that I don't have to switch brain to another mode for using a different editor, and what I want to do is fairly much always at my finger tips. (Oh, and I mostly entirely hate IDEs because they get the hell in the way of the code, waste memory, and give me no real advantages over being able to throw commands at a command line in a different window to my editor).
Anyways, you might want to look at joe if you want a small lightweight editor that has a fair number of features.
Cheers,
On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 11:16:51AM +0000, Brett Parker wrote:
On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 10:47:43AM +0000, samwise wrote:
Hey,
We touched on this briefly last night after the question was asked about the best Linux replacement for UltraEdit, but we didn't really get into it as we were all getting ready to stuff ourselves with Hoi Sin sauce.
I thought it'd make an interesting thread. So, suggestions for favourite editors.
Without getting into a flame war between vi and emacs ... what editor do you prefer for light-weight editing? i.e. not a full IDE like eclipse or KDevelop, but just for the little jobs of editing small text files.
I use vim fairly much for everything (including composing this mail, ahh for being able to use a sensible editor in your mail client), light or heavy wieght, I find that using the same editor everywhere means that I don't have to switch brain to another mode for using a different editor, and what I want to do is fairly much always at my finger tips. (Oh, and I mostly entirely hate IDEs because they get the hell in the way of the code, waste memory, and give me no real advantages over being able to throw commands at a command line in a different window to my editor).
My philosophy exactly! :-)
One to add to the pot: Bluefish. It's mostly aimed at HTML editing but is a general editor.
One criteria for me is that I need to be able to open remote files via SMB under Gnome (Ubuntu) and that unfortunately rules out a lot of GUI editors. A replacement for UltraEdit would certainly be great news; I have previously got it working under Wine but later versions don't seem to work (I don't recall how they fail now).
samwise wrote:
I thought it'd make an interesting thread. So, suggestions for favourite editors.
Without getting into a flame war between vi and emacs ... what editor do you prefer for light-weight editing? i.e. not a full IDE like eclipse or KDevelop, but just for the little jobs of editing small text files.
I use nano on my very old gentoo box, which is a nice console base
Peter - Thanks for suggesting this thread... [there is a site that lists the 750 available! for anyone wanting to explore.
I'd say gedit/kedit, Scite and Kate i quite liked - mainly because they offer tabbed windows which is ideal. vi and emacs get a NO for my tastes - although Cream offers a modern vi.
I was pleased to discover Joe and e3 with Linux as they have the Wordstar commands. Now - i'm showing my age! What was the great attraction of wordstar - the commands and typing keys were designed around the three central rows of the keyboard (the control key then was where the caps lock now is on the standard keyboard). For typists wordstar offered the best layout for touch typing and many writers still use it... on old machines i gather. So as an old doddera i've enjoyed using Joe on the terminal and Scite for several windows.
When editing being able to have several windows open is a great advantage.
james
samwise samwise@bagshot-row.org wrote:
Without getting into a flame war between vi and emacs ... what editor do you prefer for light-weight editing? [...]
Depends how light-weight. I use jed (Emacs keybindings, console, utf-8 clean and generally good at handling silly things) for general-purpose editing - this email is written in it.
On remote machines, particularly with screwed terminal settings, I use good ol' ed.
So, anyone got any other favourites worth trying? Does anyone know of a native Linux GUI app that can compete with UltraEdit et al?
GUI editing is generally done in either Emacs or wily here. wily is very very good for refactoring or hypertext editing, with its chording mouse, right-click links and remote control. Emacs has the menus and its merge applications are lovely. Both are running most of the day.
Hope that helps,
-
Adam Bower -
Bill Hill -
Brett Parker -
Chris G -
David Reynolds -
Ian Thompson-Bell -
James Freer -
Mark Rogers -
MJ Ray -
Paul Tansom -
samwise -
Simon Elliott -
Ted.Harding＠manchester.ac.uk