CodeWright Error

I have been using codewright for years and fired up an older machine only to find codewright won't run anymore. It gives the error, "Instruction at 0x101624a5 referenced memory at 0x4a7125a3. The memory could not be read." Any idea what could be wrong? I don't see where the new owners of the code are doing any support, they don't even list it as a product, it only shows up on the store order page, not in the products page. This is ver 7.5

Rick

Reply to
rickman
Loading thread data ...

Total guess but could the developers have done something clever that's now being trapped by Windows Data Execution Prevention (DEP)? This was introduced (IIRC) with XP SP2, which could match the "older machine" description. Give this a try if it is an XP box.

It's reversible, so you shouldn't nuke the PC by trying this.

Also, too: Notepad++ rox (as the kids say nowadays ;-) and it's FOSS.

formatting link

--
Rich Webb     Norfolk, VA
Reply to
Rich Webb

ee

Even older, a Win2k box. I like Win2k for most things, but networking was still pretty crude in terms of the user interface. I still can't get it to connect to my Vista machine either by Ethernet or wi-fi. If I could network them together I would just edit the files via the Vista laptop. Funny, I used to have the two Win2k desktops talking, but not with Vista.

Heck, I am finding software that needs a special "hook" compiled in to run and so far none of the software authors are willing to bother to add the free library needed from Microsoft. It may be nearing the end of the road for this venerable machine. I'm not sure how I'll do my PC/104 work in the future. This is my last machine with an ISA bus slot.

Rick

Reply to
rickman

FOSS.http://notepad-plus-plus.org/

That old, eh? How many years of cat hairs have accumulated on the heat sinks? Also possible that you may have flaky memory (well, your

*machine* may have flaky memory); try running Memtest86 or Memtest86+ overnight.
--
Rich Webb     Norfolk, VA
Reply to
Rich Webb

This won't help you with getting CodeWright running, but if you are looking for an alternative, I'd suggest Slickedit. It's much like CodeWrite but it has a lot more features. It has all the emulation modes CodeWright had plus some. It's lightweight and fast. It's also available on a lot of platforms. It's not cheap, but I have a personal copy and have kept a maintenance license active for the last seven years. I think it's well worth it.

After Borland killed Brief I moved to CodeWrite and after Borland killed CodeWright I moved to Slickedit. I really hope they stay away from Slickedit.

- Tim

--------------------------------------- Posted through

formatting link

Reply to
timkemp

Looking at emacs and vim Edwin decided to write his own editor. That was 1983. I had some design influence. Now I have an editor that runs everywhere there is a c-compiler and curses like thingy. It is configurable. The editor has two users and I'm the only one who configured it like Wordstar. Using it right now.

Groetjes Albert

--

--
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Albert van der Horst

On 7/13/2012 1:15 PM, Albert van der Horst wrote: [...]

Microsoft bought Skype and Google bought YouTube, why should Borland stay away from Slickedit? Only if it sucks.

Considering the OP is frequently posting also on comp.lang.vhdl I would definitely suggest Emacs (on Windows 2k/XP/Vista/7...). The learning curve might be a little steep at the beginning but the payback is huge.

The electric-mode for vhdl is outstanding, with templates for any sort of language construct.

You learn it once, you use it forever.

To be honest I failed to understand which editor you use.

Reply to
alb

After Borland killed Brief I moved to CodeWright, and after Borland killed CodeWright I looked around for a while, then finally started using Eclipse.

You get used to it, and while it's undergone incremental changes over the last decade, it hasn't undergone any huge stupid "improvements".

--
Tim Wescott
Control system and signal processing consulting
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Tim Wescott

Yeah, but unlike Brief or Codewright, Eclipse is "clunky" to use. I tried SlickEdit (which somebody else mentioned) but I personally found it to be a bit too intrusive.

I've been using UltraEdit for a while and have been reasonably happy with it ... it's cross platform, doesn't get in the way and in operation it feels (to me) very similar to the good old (5.5) Codewright.

George

Reply to
George Neuner

it's survivable. I find Eclipse clunky still.

Brief is actually back.

formatting link

-- Les Cargill

Reply to
Les Cargill

Wow, that brings back memories. I remember writing macros in Brief's internal Lisp dialect back in the mid/late 80's.

--
Grant Edwards               grant.b.edwards        Yow! Uh-oh!!  I forgot
                                  at               to submit to COMPULSORY
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Grant Edwards

I know that we all tend to stick with what works.

But there comes a time when your editor spends more time in the garage sleeping, has difficulty leaping up onto pieces of furniture that they had no problems with in years gone by, has lost weight, has appetite issues, and doesn't seem to have a lot of energy. You can predict that the end is near.

You might consider SlickEdit

formatting link

Reply to
David T. Ashley

Yeah, that happened to me. Over the last 30 years I have gone the Brief (Underware) -> Brief (Borland) -> CodeWright -> SlickEdit route. I have to say, CodeWright (CW) has been the best editor I have ever used and beat all the others (including SlickEdit) by a mile. It never spent any time idle, but started to have platform issues as the Windows empire continued to evolve.

I knew it was finally time to start thinking about a new editor when I ported CW to Win 7. When that happened, my CW help system would no longer work. And that is a unfortunate since CW had THE best help system of all of them. SlickEdit runs a close second place, but not quit as nice as CW was.

And if you were fortunate to have CW support like I was ($99 per year, I think), it was unmatched. Toll-free calls for support, which only occurred rarely, and the person answering the call either wrote CW, or knew who did and got answers. It was phenominal. Compare that to SlickEdit where support only gives you access to upgrades and all other inquiries are "handled" by using their forum. The forum is actually pretty good, but you may or may not get an answer to your question, and it may or may not come from SlickEdit themselves.

In my opinion SlickEdit just tries to do too much. It did not take me long to get used to it, and I seem to be managing fine with it, but some simple things are performed inconsistently. I would classify it as a very nice editor, but not the best I have used.

Lou

Reply to
Mr. C

I've been using the same CW editor since 1996 (CW 4.0e, first installed in Win95). IMO, Premia started to take backwards steps with all releases after rel 4. It will be hard to change editors when it will no longer work.

It's served me well on all platforms (Win95, WinXP, and now Win7). The strange thing about Win7 is that the CW keyboard auto-repeat would act flakey but it mysteriously and progressively corrected itself over a year of use. It works as well as it ever did now. It's weird that is was a gradual improvement. Just goes to show you modern software is so complicated it borders on organic.

JJS

Yeah, that happened to me. Over the last 30 years I have gone the Brief (Underware) -> Brief (Borland) -> CodeWright -> SlickEdit route. I have to say, CodeWright (CW) has been the best editor I have ever used and beat all the others (including SlickEdit) by a mile. It never spent any time idle, but started to have platform issues as the Windows empire continued to evolve.

I knew it was finally time to start thinking about a new editor when I ported CW to Win 7. When that happened, my CW help system would no longer work. And that is a unfortunate since CW had THE best help system of all of them. SlickEdit runs a close second place, but not quit as nice as CW was.

And if you were fortunate to have CW support like I was ($99 per year, I think), it was unmatched. Toll-free calls for support, which only occurred rarely, and the person answering the call either wrote CW, or knew who did and got answers. It was phenominal. Compare that to SlickEdit where support only gives you access to upgrades and all other inquiries are "handled" by using their forum. The forum is actually pretty good, but you may or may not get an answer to your question, and it may or may not come from SlickEdit themselves.

In my opinion SlickEdit just tries to do too much. It did not take me long to get used to it, and I seem to be managing fine with it, but some simple things are performed inconsistently. I would classify it as a very nice editor, but not the best I have used.

Lou

Reply to
John Speth

;t see

Try to reinstall CodeWright, it should help. I am using all the time in=20 everyday work CW 7.5 with Win XP SP3 with no problems. Sometimes CW stucks,= probably when turning the mouse wheel quickly - probably CW is not 100 % c= ompatible with Win XP.=20 It's a pity that CW is stopped being supported. I will pass to Win 7 soon a= nd I=20 hope CW will continue to exist. CW is probably one of the best editors ever= came. Rest to remind some of its features like: Synchronisation with Visua= l SourceSafe, F5 - possibility to split the same file into two windows, whi= ch enables editing the same file in two different locations. F7 - F8 Macro = editing and many other features.

Reply to
Yossi

Hi. I have searched over the internet about Codewright 5.1 and i found on this forum some old topics. I need to buy Codewright 5.1 and i see this is not valid anymore because is an very old. Can anyone help me PLEASE with a demo evaluation copy ?! Thank you so much Nick

Reply to
Nick

As you say, Codewright 5.1 is very old. I think you can still buy Codewright if you must, but it is likely the latest version which I believe is 7.5. I seriously doubt you will find a copy of 5.1

--

Rick
Reply to
rickman

I have to ask - /why/ are you desperate to get hold of an outdated version of an outdated editor? There was a time when CodeWrite was a top-range programmer's editor, and worth paying for - but these days there is a wide range of free editors, many with far more features than CodeWrite ever had (and others that are lighter and faster - not everyone wants a big and powerful editor). I can understand that someone who has been using CodeWrite for years would want to keep using it, but I cannot see why anyone would want it now.

I have a manual for CodeWrite 5 on my shelf, from 1997. It sits beside some LANtastic for DOS guides, right next to an 8" floppy disk.

Reply to
David Brown

--
Hi all
Thank you so much for your fast answer.
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Nick

Choice of editor is personal, and not really something people have to defend.

CodeWright's BRIEF emulation mode is better than the others.

Espilon appears to be interesting & cross-platform.

--
Les Cargill
Reply to
Les Cargill

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.