How about Best Text Editor?

There's a 32 bit version of PFE around. It's reported to no longer be maintained, but it works well and doesn't seem to have too many bugs. You can find it by searching for "programmers file editor" on the web.

I'm playing with UltraEdit but may still end up buying a copy of CodeWrite, even if it isn't supported.

--

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

In Windows, my vote to Codewright, despite its fate.

Under X, usually Nedit, sometimes XEmacs.

For Unixish text environment, Joe - nearly the old good WordStar of the CP/M days.

--

Tauno Voipio
tauno voipio (at) iki fi

PFE32 for me. The only thing I would sometimes like to do that it can't is to increase the font size temporarily to print something I can't otherwise see well.

Gary Peek industrologic.com

to me Context is very interesting...

"Gary Peek" a écrit dans le message de news: snipped-for-privacy@mycompanyname.com...

A long,long time ago, back in the TRS80 Model III days there was a text editor in an 80 Micro mag that was really great. It only took up 2K bytes(

2000 bytes), yet had all the 'normal' features. Load/save/merge,insert/delete,cursor positioning,etc. I'd like someone to compare that versus the 'bloatware' that we now have to put up with. Jay

Tim Wescott wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@corp.supernews.com:

That's actually the version I use. Thanks

--
Al Clark
Danville Signal Processing, Inc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Purveyors of Fine DSP Hardware and other Cool Stuff
Available at http://www.danvillesignal.com

Actually the "worst editor" thread started from someone's question about CodeWright (which is apparently not going to be supported). I'd sure like to find a free/cheap replacement for CodeWrite, but I may end up buying CodeWrite for the following features, of which UltraEdit appears to only have the first two:

1. Column editing. Can't be beat.

1. Regular expressions. Gotta have 'em.

2. IDE-like features -- I can compile from it, and after some work with scripts it'll go to source lines with errors automagicaly.

1. Point & click for most editing -- I don't want to learn a zillion stupid key combinations, no matter how cool they are (hence I don't like either vi or emacs).

2. Project-based find-in-files. Find-and-replace-in-files is a plus, but I'm willing to plow through sed manuals for this if necessary.

--

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

So get Slickedit. All the above and much more, available for a number of platforms, and not about to go out of business.

--
Al Balmer
Balmer Consulting
removebalmerconsultingthis@att.net

[snip discussion]

check

Edit -> Search -> Advanced Search And Replace -> (various regexp things)

check

scripts it'll go to source

Tools -> Compile

(followed by)

Compile -> Next Error Compile -> Previous Error

key combinations, no

Check

willing to plow

Cscope -> (all kinds of find things)

Check.

Looks like you need to take a look at a recent copy of Emacs. It even has a "File" menu these days.

cheers, Rich.

--
rich walker         |  Shadow Robot Company | rw@shadow.org.uk
technical director     251 Liverpool Road   |
need a Hand?           London  N1 1LX       | +UK 20 7700 2487
www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml

Alan Balmer wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

I already use Codewright, and will stick with it until Windoze breaks it. I have never needed to use their support anyway, so it really makes no difference to me whether it is still supported or not, it just keeps on working.

--
Richard

Good enough reason. My advice was for the OP (other person) who planned to go buy a copy.

--
Al Balmer
Balmer Consulting
removebalmerconsultingthis@att.net

Not really. it is all just a matter of opinion.

Ian

--
Ian Bell

Alan Balmer wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

Given my experience with it, I would have no problems recommending someone purchase it, despite it's discontinuation. It has worked fine for me on Win 98, 2000, NT 4.0, and WinXP.

--
Richard

Not to beat a dead horse, and I'm not a Codewright expert, though I've used it (have you actually compared it with Slickedit?), but for the money I'd still recommend Slickedit. It's available for platforms other than Windows, too. If there's no interest in other platforms, Multi-Edit is also good, and cheaper.

--
Al Balmer
Balmer Consulting
removebalmerconsultingthis@att.net

With all this talk of column-editing, I'm confused: what's it good for? I've coded for 20+ years and don't feel that I've missed it. Re-indenting code when cut/pasted from a different level of nesting? There are easy non-columnar ways to do that in the editors that I use.

Yep.

I like gvim and emacs' balance here: compiler and search output are parseable, so you can skip between errors, (you can make and search from within the editor), but you use your own makefile: there are no magic files produced by the IDE: there's either source or output. I hate mysterious "don't edit me" stuff.

You can actually drive gvim entirely by point-and-click, but I wouldn't recommend it for that style of use. I'd go for the corrollary: I learned the "one true set" of simple and logical :-) editing key combinations many, many years ago, and now they're built into my fingers, so I don't even have to think about them, let-alone take my hands off the keyboard to find a mouse. Being the "one true set", I can be confident that an implementation of vi will be present on or for every computer system that I need to use, so I don't have to worry about continually learning new editor commands.

[There is some argument about which is the "one true set", of course. Some claim that emacs has it. These days I point out that emacs has a nice vi emulation mode, but the reverse isn't true, so you can only be certain of vi availability...]

Gvim can run and parse grep, so it's just like a command-line, only neater. And then there's tags files. No all-files search *and replace* that I'm aware of, though. On that front, I'm intrigued by the "refactoring" support that Eclipse claims to have, and that the ISE Eiffel workbench has had for a while: apparently you actually get to muck about with class inheritance hierarchies and function and variable names at a level where the editor/thing knows what it's doing. I've never had a need to code in Java or Eiffel, though, so can't say how well those work.

Sorry for the ramble: get a craftsman talking about his tools and it's all over, I'm afraid. I'm not really trying to talk you into using gvim. Really just interested in why you (all) think that columnar editing is such a key feature.

Cheers,

--
Andrew

CodeWrite does this for you as well.

After having learned (and forgotten) emacs, enough vi to get back to the command line, Brief, enough vi to get back to the command line again, Word/Windoze, and enough vi to get back to the command line _yet again_, I'll stick with point and click.

I find that code readability is very much enhanced if long strings of defines, inline functions, member variables, etc., are arranged in columns, so all the macros or function names or whatever are in a column followed by a column of values or function bodies, followed (possibly) by comments. Similarly, long blocks of repetitive or obscure functionality are often best commented by a block of comments off to the right, all starting on the same column. Columnar editing allows you to just grab the relevant columns of stuff and move them as necessary. It's a particular godsend when you add that one macro/function/variable name that forces you to move fifty lines of comments over by a couple of spaces.

--

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

... snip ...

Try

-- Chuck F ( snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com) ( snipped-for-privacy@worldnet.att.net) Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems. USE worldnet address!

Or

(which is what I've been happily using for the last couple of years...).

Steve

There is no reason you can't run PFE under Windows XP. I often do. Google for it.

I, too, have switched to Crimson Editor.