Just a heads-up for anyone who might be interested: a native Linux version of UltraEdit has been released: http://www.ultraedit.com/Newsletters/nov09-uex/index.html
It's chargeable ($40 introductory, $70 full price) and I've not tried it yet (I'm half-way through an Ubuntu 9.04->9.10 upgrade, so now probably isn't the time to install it!) but I know there's been interest in a UE-like editor on Linux expressed here before (as much by me as anyone).
I know the majority won't be interested on price/freedom grounds. Personally I've not found anything as good on Linux as FOSS (primarily stuff like column editing). (Since the software is commercial I should point out that I am not affiliated with UE in any way.)
A colleague at work put me on to Notepad++ running under Wine as an alternative to GEdit.
I've used it a lot for my Ubuntu 9.04 boxes, however, like yourself, I'm in the middle of upgrading to 9.10 so haven't tried it with the latest release yet.
Keith
2009/11/11 Mark Rogers mark@quarella.co.uk:
Just a heads-up for anyone who might be interested: a native Linux version of UltraEdit has been released: http://www.ultraedit.com/Newsletters/nov09-uex/index.html
It's chargeable ($40 introductory, $70 full price) and I've not tried it yet (I'm half-way through an Ubuntu 9.04->9.10 upgrade, so now probably isn't the time to install it!) but I know there's been interest in a UE-like editor on Linux expressed here before (as much by me as anyone).
I know the majority won't be interested on price/freedom grounds. Personally I've not found anything as good on Linux as FOSS (primarily stuff like column editing). (Since the software is commercial I should point out that I am not affiliated with UE in any way.)
-- Mark Rogers // More Solutions Ltd (Peterborough Office) // 0844 251 1450 Registered in England (0456 0902) @ 13 Clarke Rd, Milton Keynes, MK1 1LG
The closest Linux native alternative that I use is Geany. It's a shame the Emerald Editor project appears to have never really gotten off the ground.
Would be interested to hear about anyone else's Linux options?
Peter.
2009/11/11 Keith Watson swillber@googlemail.com:
A colleague at work put me on to Notepad++ running under Wine as an alternative to GEdit.
I've used it a lot for my Ubuntu 9.04 boxes, however, like yourself, I'm in the middle of upgrading to 9.10 so haven't tried it with the latest release yet.
Keith
2009/11/11 Mark Rogers mark@quarella.co.uk:
Just a heads-up for anyone who might be interested: a native Linux version of UltraEdit has been released: http://www.ultraedit.com/Newsletters/nov09-uex/index.html
It's chargeable ($40 introductory, $70 full price) and I've not tried it yet (I'm half-way through an Ubuntu 9.04->9.10 upgrade, so now probably isn't the time to install it!) but I know there's been interest in a UE-like editor on Linux expressed here before (as much by me as anyone).
I know the majority won't be interested on price/freedom grounds. Personally I've not found anything as good on Linux as FOSS (primarily stuff like column editing). (Since the software is commercial I should point out that I am not affiliated with UE in any way.)
-- Mark Rogers // More Solutions Ltd (Peterborough Office) // 0844 251 1450 Registered in England (0456 0902) @ 13 Clarke Rd, Milton Keynes, MK1 1LG
main@lists.alug.org.uk http://www.alug.org.uk/ http://lists.alug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/main Unsubscribe? See message headers or the web site above!
At Wed, 11 Nov 2009 16:45:19 +0000, samwise wrote:
The closest Linux native alternative that I use is Geany. It's a shame the Emerald Editor project appears to have never really gotten off the ground.
Would be interested to hear about anyone else's Linux options?
You want opinions on editors?
/me hides
On 11/11/2009, Richard Lewis richardlewis@fastmail.co.uk wrote:
You want opinions on editors?
/me hides
Yes, everyone knows vim is so much better than EMACS ;)
/me ducks
Srdjan
2009/11/11 Srdjan Todorovic todorovic.s@googlemail.com:
On 11/11/2009, Richard Lewis richardlewis@fastmail.co.uk wrote:
You want opinions on editors?
/me hides
Yes, everyone knows vim is so much better than EMACS ;)
/me ducks
Real geeks use ed
/me crawls back under a rock
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 17:36:40 +0000 Srdjan Todorovic todorovic.s@googlemail.com allegedly wrote:
On 11/11/2009, Richard Lewis richardlewis@fastmail.co.uk wrote:
You want opinions on editors?
/me hides
Yes, everyone knows vim is so much better than EMACS ;)
vim is for weenies, vi rules (what's emacs?....)
M ---------------------------------------------------------------------
The text file for RFC 854 contains exactly 854 lines. Do you think there is any cosmic significance in this?
Douglas E Comer - Internetworking with TCP/IP Volume 1
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc854.txt ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Keith Watson wrote:
A colleague at work put me on to Notepad++ running under Wine as an alternative to GEdit.
I've used Notepad++ on Windows when I've needed to (actually tend to use PSPad more, couldn't tell you now why I made that decision). I do have a perpetual UE licence on Windows but it's convenient to have access to an editor I can install on other machines as required. There is no doubt (to me) that UE is better than any of the freeware Windows editors I've found, and sadly even the freeware Windows editors seem better than the Linux offerings I've found, which has always surprised me: the proportion of Linux users who write code must be quite high by comparison with other operating systems.
Obviously none of the above come close to Vi, however :-)
I've used it a lot for my Ubuntu 9.04 boxes, however, like yourself, I'm in the middle of upgrading to 9.10 so haven't tried it with the latest release yet.
Well I'm now at 9.10 (painless upgrade) so I've installed UE (Ubuntu 9.10 .deb package, 32/64 bit options available) - it opened quickly and "feels" like a native Linux app (which it is claimed to be, so that should be no surprise). I have some code to do today so I'll use it an see how I get on.
I would very much welcome suggestions as to decent FOSS alternatives however. I'm sorry, but Vi/Emacs might suit some people but I'm not one of them (I probably was once upon a time). (PS: If I want a text-mode editor I tend to use joe - Wordstar compatible key bindings anyone?)
On 12/11/2009, Mark Rogers mark@quarella.co.uk wrote:
I'm sorry, but Vi/Emacs might suit some people but I'm not one of them (I probably was once upon a time). (PS: If I want a text-mode editor I tend to use joe - Wordstar compatible key bindings anyone?)
What do you mean by text-mode editor? gvim is graphical.
Srdjan
On 12 Nov 09:23, Srdjan Todorovic wrote:
On 12/11/2009, Mark Rogers mark@quarella.co.uk wrote:
I'm sorry, but Vi/Emacs might suit some people but I'm not one of them (I probably was once upon a time). (PS: If I want a text-mode editor I tend to use joe - Wordstar compatible key bindings anyone?)
What do you mean by text-mode editor?
I believe he means "console" as apposed to a gtk window...
gvim is graphical.
at which point that's a fail ;) (but good ol' normal vim is fine).
Anyways - I'm an avid vim user - but I can understand that there are people out there that don't want to just get things done, and so don't want to bother to learn the (very useful) bits of vim... for those, there's always jedit - which is one of the better graphical editors I've used... or Kate (yes, it's KDE, but it's actually not bad), or, IIRC, scite isn't too bad.
(Now, if we can keep the thread out of the realms of windows software... especially for text editors... ;)
Ta,
Brett Parker wrote:
I believe he means "console" as apposed to a gtk window...
Yup!
To be clear, what I am after is a decent GUI editor. I already have my console needs satisfied by joe (which I find a lot easier than vi[m]).
there's always jedit - which is one of the better graphical editors I've used... or Kate (yes, it's KDE, but it's actually not bad), or, IIRC, scite isn't too bad.
Kate I quite like, but because I run Gnome it tends to be slow to load because of the KDE libs overhead. Scite I seem to recall playing with but not for long, so I guess I wasn't a fan although I have no idea why now!
I quite like Bluefish (www.bluefish.nl) but the packaged version in the repos is old (1.07) and missing a lot of the features that would make it a good bet. However I have just discovered Ubuntu packages on the website of the unstable version (1.3.7). It seems odd that they have gone from 1.0.x (stable) to 1.3.x (unstable) without a stable release in the meantime, but that seems to be the situation.
(Now, if we can keep the thread out of the realms of windows software... especially for text editors... ;)
Absolutely!
On 12-Nov-09 09:35:00, Brett Parker wrote:
On 12 Nov 09:23, Srdjan Todorovic wrote:
On 12/11/2009, Mark Rogers mark@quarella.co.uk wrote:
I'm sorry, but Vi/Emacs might suit some people but I'm not one of them (I probably was once upon a time). (PS: If I want a text-mode editor I tend to use joe - Wordstar compatible key bindings anyone?)
What do you mean by text-mode editor?
I believe he means "console" as apposed to a gtk window...
gvim is graphical.
at which point that's a fail ;) (but good ol' normal vim is fine).
Anyways - I'm an avid vim user - but I can understand that there are people out there that don't want to just get things done, and so don't want to bother to learn the (very useful) bits of vim... for those, there's always jedit - which is one of the better graphical editors I've used... or Kate (yes, it's KDE, but it's actually not bad), or, IIRC, scite isn't too bad.
(Now, if we can keep the thread out of the realms of windows software... especially for text editors... ;)
Ta,
Brett Parker
Interesting thread! Now that it looks as though vim is romping home in its rightful place at the head of the field, let me ask advocates of other editors how they would achieve the following editing task.
You have a long document, in which are lots of occurrences of numbers which have the Contintental separator system ("." to separate thousands, "," for the decimal point). So, for instance, one million Francs and 25 Centimes is 1.000.000,25
Now run a global edit to convert these into the Real Thing, so that the above example becomes 1,000,000.25 for instance.
(OK, maybe there are editors which simply have a drop-down menu item which says "Convert to British", but that's MS-style "It seems you're trying to convert between Continental and British numbering. Never mind, I'll do it all for you; go make a coffee" and may well be flaky ... so I consider that cheating ... ).
Talking of which, time to take tongue out of cheek and make that coffee.
Ted.
-------------------------------------------------------------------- E-Mail: (Ted Harding) Ted.Harding@manchester.ac.uk Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 094 0861 Date: 12-Nov-09 Time: 10:05:30 ------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------
(Ted Harding) wrote:
You have a long document, in which are lots of occurrences of numbers which have the Contintental separator system ("." to separate thousands, "," for the decimal point). So, for instance, one million Francs and 25 Centimes is 1.000.000,25
Now run a global edit to convert these into the Real Thing, so that the above example becomes 1,000,000.25 for instance.
I would never end up with an editor for day-to-day tasks that couldn't handle regex search+replace so although I'd have to think about it I could do it relatively quickly with anything I'd use. Or I'd do it 3-stage to avoid thinking ("," to "x" then "." to "," then "x" to ".", depending on the actual data I was working with). If I did this routinely I'd come up with a better solution (I've never actually had to do it yet!)
Of note with UE is it's column edit mode, which (depending on the alignment of the numbers) would allow you to select the column of "," and fill with ".", and vice versa. Probably not the best solution here but column mode is surprisingly useful for quick hacks when the brain isn't engaged fully.
What would be the vim solution to your task?
Key features I look for in an editor are (off the top of my head): - ability to edit files in place across networks (including FTP/SSH) - column mode (I usually have to give up on this one) - ability to handle "any" file (binary files, files with really long line lengths, large files in general) without breaking the file on saving and without taking a long time to load the file to start with. - syntax highlighting and (ideally) code folding (most have this these days) - simple macro support - project support
(Ted Harding) wrote:
Interesting thread! Now that it looks as though vim is romping home in its rightful place at the head of the field, let me ask advocates of other editors how they would achieve the following editing task.
You have a long document, in which are lots of occurrences of numbers which have the Contintental separator system ("." to separate thousands, "," for the decimal point). So, for instance, one million Francs and 25 Centimes is 1.000.000,25
Now run a global edit to convert these into the Real Thing, so that the above example becomes 1,000,000.25 for instance.
<untested and from memory> for vi / vim
:1,$s/([0-9]).([0-9])/\1~#~\2/g :1,$s/([0-9]),([0-9])/\1.\2/g :1,$s/~#~/,/g
for kate (check reg exp & use place holders) [ctrl]+R <find string>([0-9]),([0-9]) <replace string> \1~#~\2 [ctrl]+R <find string>([0-9]).([0-9]) <replace string> \1,\2 [ctrl]+R <find string>~#~ <replace string> .
easy.
On 12-Nov-09 10:45:02, nev young wrote:
(Ted Harding) wrote:
Interesting thread! Now that it looks as though vim is romping home in its rightful place at the head of the field, let me ask advocates of other editors how they would achieve the following editing task.
You have a long document, in which are lots of occurrences of numbers which have the Contintental separator system ("." to separate thousands, "," for the decimal point). So, for instance, one million Francs and 25 Centimes is 1.000.000,25
Now run a global edit to convert these into the Real Thing, so that the above example becomes 1,000,000.25 for instance.
<untested and from memory> for vi / vim
:1,$s/([0-9]).([0-9])/\1~#~\2/g :1,$s/([0-9]),([0-9])/\1.\2/g :1,$s/~#~/,/g
That's basically exactly it -- except don't use "~#~" for the first replacement (since "~" is special). I assume you wanted to plant a pattern which would very probably be unique to its context (rather than simply "#"), in view of your last line.
So you should use something like
:1,$s/([0-9]).([0-9])/\1@#@\2/g :1,$s/([0-9]),([0-9])/\1.\2/g :1,$s/@#@/,/g
for kate (check reg exp & use place holders) [ctrl]+R <find string>([0-9]),([0-9]) <replace string> \1~#~\2 [ctrl]+R <find string>([0-9]).([0-9]) <replace string> \1,\2 [ctrl]+R <find string>~#~ <replace string> .
easy.
nev
Easy yes -- and just as easy in vim!
Regarding Mark Rogers' point about column editing: vim has that too in a very adaptable form: First select a column (or a bank of adjacent columns) with Ctrl-V followed by curesor movements. However, be careful about ":" editing commands, since all the rows in which any column has been highlighted are considered as a row-range for ":".
-------------------------------------------------------------------- E-Mail: (Ted Harding) Ted.Harding@manchester.ac.uk Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 094 0861 Date: 12-Nov-09 Time: 11:14:30 ------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------
(Ted Harding) wrote:
On 12-Nov-09 10:45:02, nev young wrote:
(Ted Harding) wrote:
Interesting thread! Now that it looks as though vim is romping home in its rightful place at the head of the field, let me ask advocates of other editors how they would achieve the following editing task.
You have a long document, in which are lots of occurrences of numbers which have the Contintental separator system ("." to separate thousands, "," for the decimal point). So, for instance, one million Francs and 25 Centimes is 1.000.000,25
Now run a global edit to convert these into the Real Thing, so that the above example becomes 1,000,000.25 for instance.
<untested and from memory> for vi / vim
:1,$s/([0-9]).([0-9])/\1~#~\2/g :1,$s/([0-9]),([0-9])/\1.\2/g :1,$s/~#~/,/g
That's basically exactly it -- except don't use "~#~" for the first replacement (since "~" is special). I assume you wanted to plant a pattern which would very probably be unique to its context (rather than simply "#"), in view of your last line.
Bother. I'd forgotten tilda was special but I CBA to write "some unique string" ;-)
<anecdote> Back in about 1977 when "word processing" was all new and shiny I watched a salesman demonstrate the power of text replacement on the new "word processing machine" by taking a document and replacing every letter "a" with an "e". Then he showed how they could all be changed back, along with every "e" that had been there to start with. Oh how we laughed at him. </anecdote>
At Thu, 12 Nov 2009 10:05:36 -0000 (GMT), (Ted Harding) wrote:
On 12-Nov-09 09:35:00, Brett Parker wrote:
On 12 Nov 09:23, Srdjan Todorovic wrote:
On 12/11/2009, Mark Rogers mark@quarella.co.uk wrote:
I'm sorry, but Vi/Emacs might suit some people but I'm not one of them (I probably was once upon a time). (PS: If I want a text-mode editor I tend to use joe - Wordstar compatible key bindings anyone?)
What do you mean by text-mode editor?
I believe he means "console" as apposed to a gtk window...
gvim is graphical.
at which point that's a fail ;) (but good ol' normal vim is fine).
Anyways - I'm an avid vim user - but I can understand that there are people out there that don't want to just get things done, and so don't want to bother to learn the (very useful) bits of vim... for those, there's always jedit - which is one of the better graphical editors I've used... or Kate (yes, it's KDE, but it's actually not bad), or, IIRC, scite isn't too bad.
(Now, if we can keep the thread out of the realms of windows software... especially for text editors... ;)
Ta,
Brett Parker
Interesting thread! Now that it looks as though vim is romping home in its rightful place at the head of the field, let me ask advocates of other editors how they would achieve the following editing task.
You have a long document, in which are lots of occurrences of numbers which have the Contintental separator system ("." to separate thousands, "," for the decimal point). So, for instance, one million Francs and 25 Centimes is 1.000.000,25
Now run a global edit to convert these into the Real Thing, so that the above example becomes 1,000,000.25 for instance.
(OK, maybe there are editors which simply have a drop-down menu item which says "Convert to British", but that's MS-style "It seems you're trying to convert between Continental and British numbering. Never mind, I'll do it all for you; go make a coffee" and may well be flaky ... so I consider that cheating ... ).
Talking of which, time to take tongue out of cheek and make that coffee.
Here's some elisp:
(defun switch-currency-separators-buffer (old-group-separator old-decimal-separator) (interactive (let ((g-s (read-from-minibuffer "Old group separator: " ".")) (d-s (read-from-minibuffer "Old decimal separator: " ","))) (list g-s d-s))) (save-excursion (goto-char (point-min)) (while (re-search-forward (format "\b\([0-9\%s]+\)\%s\([0-9][0-9]\)\b" old-group-separator old-decimal-separator) nil t) (replace-match (concat (replace-regexp-in-string (format "\%s" old-group-separator) old-decimal-separator (match-string-no-properties 1)) old-group-separator (match-string-no-properties 2))))))
(defun switch-currency-separators-region (beg end old-group-separator old-decimal-separator) (interactive (let ((g-s (read-from-minibuffer "Old group separator: " ".")) (d-s (read-from-minibuffer "Old decimal separator: " ","))) (list (region-beginning) (region-end) g-s d-s))) (save-excursion (goto-char beg) (while (and (re-search-forward (format "\b\([0-9\%s]+\)\%s\([0-9][0-9]\)\b" old-group-separator old-decimal-separator) nil t) (<= (point) end)) (replace-match (concat (replace-regexp-in-string (format "\%s" old-group-separator) old-decimal-separator (match-string-no-properties 1)) old-group-separator (match-string-no-properties 2))))))
Richard Lewis wrote:
(Ted Harding) wrote:
Now run a global edit to convert these into the Real Thing, so that the above example becomes 1,000,000.25 for instance.
[...]
Here's some elisp:
(defun switch-currency-separators-buffer (old-group-separator old-decimal-separator)
; and so on ...
Well that's a big sledgehammer, but worth it if you meet this a lot, I guess.
I was pondering either Edit: Replace: Replace Regexp or using replace-rectangle a few times.
Hope that helps,
MJ Ray wrote:
I was pondering either Edit: Replace: Replace Regexp or using replace-rectangle a few times.
I was trying to find a good regex for replacement but I'm not sure if the recursion is possible?
The following should match them: (.(\d{3}))+,(\d{2}) .. but I'd have no idea how to replace them. Alternatively, replace .(\d{3}) with ,\1 replace ,(\d{2}[^\d]) with .\1
Brett Parker wrote:
Anyways - I'm an avid vim user - but I can understand that there are people out there that don't want to just get things done, and so don't want to bother to learn the (very useful) bits of vim... for those, there's always jedit - which is one of the better graphical editors I've used... or Kate (yes, it's KDE, but it's actually not bad),
I have to admit to being a kate user. Not that it's better than vi (or vim) but I do find I tend to be editing multiple files simultaneously these days and find it easier for that reason only.
It's amazing how many of my text files end up with a spurious ZZ in them. ;-)
-
Brett Parker -
John Woodard -
Keith Watson -
Mark Rogers -
mick -
MJ Ray -
nev young -
Richard Lewis -
samwise -
Srdjan Todorovic -
steve-ALUG＠hst.me.uk -
Ted.Harding＠manchester.ac.uk