>emacs

Does anyone know of an editor better than emacs? I'm also wondering how I can change the default encoding to utf-8, on emacs or anything else.

ANYTHING is better than emacs. Seriously. What platform are you using? Ultraedit is good if you're using windows.

vim
ignore >>2, anyone who thinks ultraedit is good isn't worth listening to.

UltraEdit or PSPad, and either have great Unicode support.
ignore >>3, anyone who thinks vim is good isn't worth listening to.

a) Anyone who likes UltraEdit really isn't worth listening to
b) Anyone who likes vim has my condolences. (It's not a bad editor, but lacks support for some key features)
c) Emacs is certainly one of the best editors out there. Even vim zealots agree.
d) PSPad looks like just another of the hundreds of freeware editors out there. I've seen enough of them.

>>5
Troll less

a) Yay
b) So you're an emacs faggot
c) Told ya
d) Yes, only not

not again. Can't someone make a permanent page for the editor war threads?

>>7
Already done, see here:
http://world4ch.org/prog/

>>5
b
Which key features? Built in Emacs Lisp interpreter?

jEdit is nice but requires Java.

>>10
Then it's not nice, you moron

The slight mention of vim wins this topic.
Emacs is not bad but it's more of an OS then a text editor.
PSpad == Shit because it's a fucking notepad people
Ultraedit is worse then PSpad.
If you're on windows I sugjest gvim or ConTEXT

esr (a God among men) groups Emacs in the same category as operating systems. We must read his immortal words and take them to our hearts or perish.

PSpad == Shit because it's a fucking notepad people

you say that as if there's something wrong with a text editor that's based around editing text instead of a text editor that's based on 1970's terminal keyboards or a LISP operating system.

>>14
Line editor, Vim is a line editor ok.

esr (a God among men)

That had damn well better be sarcasm.

>>16
You're an idiot if you can't read the sarcasm in "We must read his immortal words and take them to our hearts or perish."

>>17
If you were speaking of, say, ken or RMS, it would be possible to say that without sarcasm, and some people inexplicably hold ESR in similar esteem to real hackers, so assuming idiocy is unfair.

If you were speaking of, say, ken or RMS, it would be possible to say that without sarcasm,
That had damn well better be sarcasm.

>>19
>If you were speaking of, say, Gates or Jobs, it would be possible to say that without sarcasm, and some people inexplicably hold ken and RMS in similar esteem to real hackers, so assuming idiocy is unfair.

If you were speaking of, say, Larry Ellison or Al Gore, it would be possible to say that without sarcasm, and some people inexplicably hold ken, RMS, ESR or Linus Tarballs in similar esteem to real hackers, so assuming idiocy is unfair.

use vi, it's awesome. and tiny.

>>22 VIM is nearly as bloated as emacs is.

And I *know* it's VIM you're talking about (as opposed to traditional BSD VI).

VIM = shit, VI = diarrhea(sp?don'tcare)

Elvis is a decent vi. Most of the nicer functions without being xbox like vim.

However, it's still vi. Only good for remote sessions.

>>23
No, I was talking about BSD vi, not this new fangled VIM you speak of.

ed > vi > emacs

>>27
Truth has been told.

>>27 is always true.
>>28 always lies.

>>29 lies.

>>30
Problem solved.

I like emacs when working on LISP code (via SLIME -- it gives me a boner), and the fact that emacs can format your code's intentation in like 5000 different styles of your choice.

But yeah having to memorize the multitude of key combinations is total balls :(

print one of these http://refcards.com/refcards/gnu-emacs/ . But yes I like gvim better, but to program lisp emacs-slime rules!

>>27 = real programmer
Unless you're retarded, you don't need anything more than your operating system's default text editor when you're coding.

No, but the right editor can make a difference in productivity.

>>35
fap fap scalable fap fap productivity fap fap enterprise fap fap

>>36 writes HTML in notepad and thinks that makes him a programmer.

If it isn't FSF approved it isn't worth using.

>>37 writes professional scalable business solutions in J2EE using NetBeans and thinks that makes him a programmer.

vim, or if you're a wimp try nano

>>36
Actually, I just hate wasting my time. See, I have better things to do than masturbate over my leetness while getting the same amount of work done.

Get a life, you fat penguin fucker. You're just as stupid as the Java groupies.

>>41
Well basically everyone apart from you knows that you need a decent editor to get work done.

>>39
I said editor not IDE you tosspiece.

>>37
No I do not!  I use GVim.

>>41
fap fap serious fap fap eclipse fap fap leetspeak fap fap

A lot of people think that the point of vim is the fact that it's rudimentary, hard to use, or more "hack-ish".  You are idiots.  You fools who think vim is just --Notepad.  Use vim because in vim you can do anything -- and you can do it fast.

In the University, we had to program on the mainframe.  Our options were vim, nano, and emacs.  This was just 5 years ago --  the programs weren't any different from how they are today.  Our connection was blazing fast.  We just didn't know how to edit efficiently without a mouse.

I picked vim because of the syntax highlighting.  Even a noob like me could make that work in vim, even over a terminal.

At first... I could turn on syntax highlighting and drudge through editing and saving files.
After a week, I could properly get in/out of insert mode.  I could properly save and quit.  I stopped hitting the wrong buttons.
Next week, I started 'w' 'b' 'gg' 'G' '$' '^' 'gw' 'gb'.  Editing was much faster than with nano.  I also started made my own .vimrc file.
Next week, I stopped using the arrow keys all together. 'h' 'j' 'k' 'l' were my friends.  The hands never left home keys.  Editing speed up.  Editing was faster than with a GUI.
Next week, I went through all the options.  I customized .vimrc.  vim work/looked how I wanted it to.  I learned regular expressions.  I would search and substitute my files instead of editing them.
Next week I started using :split.  I could edit multiple files.  I still didn't have to use a mouse or move my hands.  I didn't realise this would be possible to do over a terminal.
Now, I just periodically learn things.  Stuff I used to use the command line for (grep -n "killIntMatrix" *), it turns out vim can do better and faster '[I' .  Macros speed through repetetive edits if I don't know the regex to use.
I still only know what about half the keys do in vim.  I still don't fully understand how to use vim.
What what little I do know, vim is a better editor for most tasks than anything that would force me to unnecisarily use the mouse, keys not close to the home row, 3 buttons at a time.
For anything that could be described as 'code' (shell scripts, HTML, C code, WC3 Jass scripts, &ct), vim's perfect.
For writing my resume, vim is useless.  If you want to know what editor to use for writing a resume or english paper, use Word.


Oh, btw UTF encoding in vim:
set encoding=utf-8

Pulling up the help file for utf encoding
:help utf

>>44
I predict this post is going to be turned into copypasta, delicious copypasta.  Take that!, emacs users!

Well basically everyone apart from you knows that you need a decent editor to get work done.

Given the argument, that's a non sequitur.

Better luck next time.

I always thought Unix people were so idiotic with their HJKL keys. If they were going to use keys as arrows because terminals blew or they were stupid, why not using WSAD or EDSF? Why using a braindamaged horizontal combination? Before you post, the home row is not a good argument because EDSF is just as good (as you never press up and down at the same time), only much more intuitive, realistic and common sense. Perhaps I already answered my question.

>>47
Your complaint amounts to "vim is stupid because people who don't know how to use it can't use it".  I mean seriously, if you don't like it, then use the arrow keys.  I know I did before I knew how to use vim.

I didn't design the layout, so I can't say for sure, but the layout makes sens to me.
Before I start, it's worth pointing out that 'j' and 'k' are the really important keys.  While it's neccisary to be able to move left and right, it's not needed as often as up and down.  'h' is chosen because it's left of 'j'.  'l' is chosen because it's right of 'k'.

Why 'j' and 'k':
1) vim isn't designed to be intuitive.  It's deigned to be efficient if you know how to use it.
2) The keys are placed on the right hand, since most people are right handed.
3) The keys are placed on the two main fingers.

There could be other layouts I suppose... but sweet jesus, not 'wasd' or 'edsf'.

>>48
The keys are placed on the right hand, since most people are right handed.
Shows how much did the vi/Unix guys know. While most are right-handed, it has been observed that we can handle directions with our left hands better. Try driving a bicycle with only one hand. Which one drives better? Also, ever wondered why console gamepads always had the main directional pads in the left side for use with your left hand?

>>49
troll

>>50
look who's talking

>>47
hjkl are all on the home row. Once you get used to using them it's actually tons better than the arrow keys because you don't have to move your hand.

>>49
i always wondered why they didn't just use a, s, d, and w like a lot of old games do...

>>53
Yeah, I remember the days when I played Battlefield.  The good old days.

>>52
Yes, but how about EDSF? All on the home row and fastest fingers, except for E which is over D and you don't use them together, with the advantage that they are in your left hand.

fgsfds is all on the home row, bitches!

>>56
rarlab.de

>>55
Look, "vim sucks because of 'hjkl'" is trite.

What set of keys you use to scroll up or down is minute in comparison to the other differences between vim and other editors, which is what this thread is about.

49 has a serious credibility gap to cover in the clain that "the left hand is better at pushing up and down buttons because we steer better with it."  I've tried finding a source to verify or deny the claim, and I'm 95% sure that it was just made up.

Finally, I'm pretty certain this is a case of "This thing that I don't understand isn't good because X".  Learn to use vim.  Learn it with the 'hjkl'.  Remap your keys to 'esdf'.  Find out how wonderful 'esdf' is, and tell the world about it.  Then you'll be qualified to have an opinion.

Face it, vim wouldn't have lived as long as it has unless it was a good editor.  If you think vim's horrid... well, you must be missing something.  I'm not railing against emacs here, am I?  The question here is "which one is the best".  Saying "This editor that's stood the test of time's horrid because of minute detail" is tangent to the thread and doesn't really suggest a good editor.

>>58
>>55 didn't say vim sucks. and 'hjkl' is not specific to vim. decent editors like nvi and elvis use the same keys.

Too bad elvis isn't seeing any developer love any more.

>>58
Your credibility is zero, you are using a tripcode.

(Your points are correct though.)

holy shit, that's why vim cursor controls have always been such a bitch to learn. because the hjkl controls are made for a qwerty keyboard! i never realized that before. now i see why they chose such random senseless keys. arrow keys are superior, because they don't depend on keyboard layout.

And what if you wanted to type a letter instead of moving the cursor around? Vim is made for people who like things unnecessarily difficult because they simply MUST use all their intellect to do simple things. I don't care if Vim cooks chili and fries, the poster above me is right.  Use ed or notepad or something, or fuck, an IDE and get on with your actual work.

>>61
Because tripcode clearly makes his points wrong.

I thought the point of an anonymous board was to consider arguments on their merit alone. Guess not.

>>62
>>63
You two are aware that vim supports the use of cursor keys without any configuration? hjkl are there for people who aren't, like you, incompetent.

>>64 Fails at reading the second line of >>61.

>You two are aware that vim supports the use of cursor keys without any configuration? hjkl are there for people who aren't, like you, incompetent.
Incompetent my ass. They are for the people I described in >>63 and really need to stop being so arrogant.

>>65
My point is, why was he bitching about a tripcode in the first place? Who the fuck cares?

Of all the irrelevant things, that's what caused a valid post to "fail"?

>>58
1. Tripfag

2. I did verify with a number of people that we steer better with the left hand, and it's a matter of fact that all gamepad designers, including those with millions of dollars of budget to create the most comfortable gamepad ever placed the main directional pads on the left.

3. No, vim didn't stay around for so long because it was good. It stayed alive because it's the only piece of shit you had to edit text files under Unix in a more-powerful-than-Notepad sense until RMS came up with emacs, which sucks too. It also stayed because terminals were a piece of shit and didn't have/had crippled control and arrow keys and were all different, because of which you had to work with alphanumeric keys on terminals. For good or bad (good in the past, probably not as good today), Unix is very terminal-oriented. On top of that, vi is always available while other possibly better editors aren't, just like zip is always available while rar or 7-zip aren't. Even today, when you connect to some host, the only editor you know for sure that will work is vi, because it's always available and because it doesn't require any special key other than Escape.

But this doesn't make vim any good. Not at all. In fact, it isn't. At all.

>>67
Lurk moar.

>>66
If a feature bothers you how about not using it instead of demanding that no one should use it. And you call others arrogant.

BTW, forgot to say I've been playing 2D and 3D games (heavily direction-oriented) for years, accounting thousands of hours, and the most comfortable keys were WSAD (EDSF would be exactly the same, only more comfortable when you're writing, not playing games, as your hands are closer together). I *always* use WSAD if I can.

Either way, having directions in the home row isn't worth having  a modal editor. You have two extra keystrokes for every piece of shit arrow you want to press, and you have to press Esc which requires you to move your hands out of it just like the arrow keys, so stop smoking.

>>70
Yes I agree having to press Esc is dumb. I think on some early keyboards Esc was lower down the keyboard or something. That's why you should bind caps lock to switch between insert/command modes. No one seriously needs CRUISE CONTROL anyway.

Plus as I've mentioned several times, no one is forcing you to use hjkl. The arrow keys are right there for you, so bitching about a feature you're never going to use is dumb. Really dumb.

One issue is that some versions of vi won't let you use the arrow keys, so if you want to move around in the text, you have no choice but to change modes.

Not vim's problem though.

>>69
I've been lurking a long time, thanks. This "zOMG tripfag" stupidity is a more recent phenomenon. Nobody used to give a shit.

>>71
I know; if I absolutely have to use vim I use the arrows; I was just bitching at Unix tard stuff.

>>68
2 corrections:

1. Zip is not always available, it is a proprietary standard, considered evil, etc.  If you are unlucky your *x will drop a statically compiled [un]zip in /opt, the worst fate possible.

2. vi does not work the same everywhere, ed does, that is why ed is the Standard Editor.

>>75
zip is NOT proprietary, duh.

>>75
If zip was proprietary, pkware will be laughing their way to the bank today. Too bad it isn't. SAD FACE.

vi does not work the same everywhere, ed does

So let me get this straight: instead of semi-shit, we should be using wet splattery diarrhea ^ 1000000?

I'm guessing you think Fortran is the shit too.

>>78
Indeed, Fortran sucks.

I am not saying what you should do, I only present the facts.  GET THE FACTS YOU UNIX HIPPIE!!!!!

>>69
The reason I have anything to say at all is because apparently everyone keeps talking about it, and the whole point is it doesn't matter and it doesn't break your life. Get on with your actual work.

>>79
GET THE FACTS YOU UNIX HIPPIE!!!!!

a) I don't like UNIX.
b) POSIX 1003.2 defines both ed and vi.

In short, you should practice what you preach.

Why is Unix so fucking popular? Every fucking thing has to be a Unix OS, save for Windows NT/ReactOS and VMS.

>>81
vi can be configured by a system-wide configuration file, and different compilation flags

ed cannot

>>83
What does that have to do with a standard editor?

o shi, I can configure vi (a bit).

>>84
ed *is* the standard editor.  That is a fact.

>>85
Says who? 1003.2 defines both of them.

>>82
The same reason people listen to consultants, they're all stupid