>>18,19
My point exactly. Vim and Emacs are fucking great editors, each with pros and cons. Either one will suffice for pretty much editing task, making the choice a matter of preference. There is no best text editor.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-29 19:56 ID:hi2hAl7h
Learning anything other than vi(m) or Emacs is a waste of time. It won't be installed on computers you go to use, and you'll have to learn a new editor in a few years time.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-29 20:43 ID:WzRy0SH4
Does anyone else suspect that all the Vimfags are just trying to sound elitist? I know Vim, and I use it whenever I need to do some quick edits in the console (unless I know the contents of the file well enough to just jump in with ed), but I don't go around acting like it's anything amazing.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-29 20:49 ID:WzRy0SH4
>>22
Oh noes, I might have to learn more than one editor! Who doesn't know their way around vi, Emacs, and ed at minimum? Familiarity with other editors is a given, but they're all simple enough that learning them completely is the work of a few hours rather than weeks for Vim and forever for Emacs. The intelligent computer user learns the two you can count on finding everywhere, learns Emacs because it's cool, then proceeds to use Acme because it's the best.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-29 20:50 ID:FHfbVJFR
Kate. You don't have to learn it. It's intuitive, unlike Emacs and vim. And it's about as powerful — every bit as powerful in KDE 4.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-29 20:52 ID:WzRy0SH4
>>25 And it's about as powerful — every bit as powerful in KDE 4.
I don't habeeb it.
GNU Emacs. «I use emacs, which might be thought of as a thermonuclear word processor. It was created by Richard Stallman; enough said. It is written in Lisp, which is the only computer language that is beautiful. It is colossal, and yet it only edits straight ASCII text files, which is to say, no fonts, no boldface, no underlining. In other words, the engineer-hours that, in the case of Microsoft Word, were devoted to features like mail merge, and the ability to embed feature-length motion pictures in corporate memoranda, were, in the case of emacs, focused with maniacal intensity on the deceptively simple-seeming problem of editing text. If you are a professional writer--i.e., if someone else is getting paid to worry about how your words are formatted and printed--emacs outshines all other editing software in approximately the same way that the noonday sun does the stars. It is not just bigger and brighter; it simply makes everything else vanish.» -- Neal Stephenson on Emacs
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-30 3:29 ID:jssuWRLI
vim fuckin rules
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-30 3:55 ID:dWUfuiHj
vim does not have LISP as its scripting language. THREAD FUCKING OVER?
>>47
I defy you to post a program you've written in ed. I tried using it once. For some reason I thought it would be a good idea to use ed to write a clone of ed. Go figure. I lost interest pretty quick, but ed's lack of auto-indentation was a pain in the ass.
Someone needs to write a version of ed with all the things that make modern editors great -- auto indentation, code completion, syntax highlighting, and so on. Lulz would be had.
>>50
Sort of, except using Vim is very different from using ed (hjkl movement, for starters), and I don't believe ex mode has all the modern editor goodies that Vim has.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-30 17:16 ID:2LnzlXrI
My other ed is an edwin.
Which is an EMACS.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-30 17:37 ID:Nlup7Zb4
BTW, Emacsfags, please answer this question. If Emacs is based on Emacs-Lisp and Edwin is based on Scheme, doesn't that make Edwin superior?
Notepad++: Relatively small, relatively simple, but has loads of useful features and can splitscreen. Combined with the joys of Cygwin/make/gcc and shellscripts, it makes the ideal Windows development environment: one with the least Microsoft software possible.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-30 20:10 ID:MxDMZMJz
text wrangler
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-30 21:30 ID:xvIJwVFB
>>56
Yeah, you're the elitist assholes who can't laugh at themselves. Or have you forgotten which text editor comes with its own list of humorous jibes?
But real Vim users are beside the point here. I suspect that you "Vim are teh best" fags are just trying to sound like programming's elite.
>>54
I think it means that Climacs > Emacs. Someday.
When I log into my Xenix system with my 110 baud teletype, both vi
*and* Emacs are just too damn slow. They print useless messages like,
'C-h for help' and '"foo" File is read only'. So I use the editor
that doesn't waste my VALUABLE time.
Ed, man! !man ed
ED(1) Unix Programmer's Manual ED(1)
NAME
ed - text editor
SYNOPSIS
ed [ - ] [ -x ] [ name ]
DESCRIPTION
Ed is the standard text editor.
---
Computer Scientists love ed, not just because it comes first
alphabetically, but because it's the standard. Everyone else loves ed
because it's ED!
"Ed is the standard text editor."
And ed doesn't waste space on my Timex Sinclair. Just look:
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root 24 Oct 29 1929 /bin/ed
-rwxr-xr-t 4 root 1310720 Jan 1 1970 /usr/ucb/vi
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root 5.89824e37 Oct 22 1990 /usr/bin/emacs
Of course, on the system *I* administrate, vi is symlinked to ed.
Emacs has been replaced by a shell script which 1) Generates a syslog
message at level LOG_EMERG; 2) reduces the user's disk quota by 100K;
and 3) RUNS ED!!!!!!
"Ed is the standard text editor."
Let's look at a typical novice's session with the mighty ed:
---
Note the consistent user interface and error reportage. Ed is
generous enough to flag errors, yet prudent enough not to overwhelm
the novice with verbosity.
"Ed is the standard text editor."
Ed, the greatest WYGIWYG editor of all.
ED IS THE TRUE PATH TO NIRVANA! ED HAS BEEN THE CHOICE OF EDUCATED
AND IGNORANT ALIKE FOR CENTURIES! ED WILL NOT CORRUPT YOUR PRECIOUS
BODILY FLUIDS!! ED IS THE STANDARD TEXT EDITOR! ED MAKES THE SUN
SHINE AND THE BIRDS SING AND THE GRASS GREEN!!
When I use an editor, I don't want eight extra KILOBYTES of worthless
help screens and cursor positioning code! I just want an EDitor!!
Not a "viitor". Not a "emacsitor". Those aren't even WORDS!!!! ED!
ED! ED IS THE STANDARD!!!
TEXT EDITOR.
When IBM, in its ever-present omnipotence, needed to base their
"edlin" on a Unix standard, did they mimic vi? No. Emacs? Surely
you jest. They chose the most karmic editor of all. The standard.
Ed is for those who can *remember* what they are working on. If you
are an idiot, you should use Emacs. If you are an Emacs, you should
not be vi. If you use ED, you are on THE PATH TO REDEMPTION. THE
SO-CALLED "VISUAL" EDITORS HAVE BEEN PLACED HERE BY ED TO TEMPT THE
FAITHLESS. DO NOT GIVE IN!!! THE MIGHTY ED HAS SPOKEN!!!
>>70
HAHAHAHA
YOU THINK YOURE THOUGH UH ?
I HAVE ONE WORD FOR YOU
THE FORCED INDENTATION OF THE CODE
GET IT ?
I DONT THINK SO
YOU DONT KNOW ABOUT MY OTHER CAR I GUESS ?
ITS A CDR
YOU PRONOUNCE IT CUDDER OK YOU FUQIN ANGERED AN EXPERT PROGRAMMER
THIS IS /PROG/
YOU ARE ALLOWED TO POST HERE ONLY IF YOU HAVE ACHIEVED SATORI
PROGRAMMING IS ALL ABOUT ``ABSTRACT BULLSHITE" THAT YOU WILL NEVER COMPREHEND
I HAVE READ SICP
IF ITS NOT DONE YOU HAVE TO
TOO BAD RUBY ON RAIL IS SLOW AS FUCK BBCODE AND SCHEME ARE THE ULTIMATE LANGUAGES
``THIS IS THE PROPER WAY TO QUOTE"
ALSO
WELCOME TO /PROG/
EVERY THREAD WILL BE REPLIED TO
NO EXCEPTION
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-01 19:05 ID:ELItHfHU
``ABSTRACT BULLSHITE'' is an anagram of ``STABS HITLER AT CLUB''
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-01 19:17 ID:9tVFts4o
>>68
You have made the fallacy of Argument from Silence. I just choose not to tell you because unlike smug lisp weenies, I don't want to help you retards become Scheme programmers. If you thought Scheme was a good language, you'd learn yourself. Fuck off.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-01 19:26 ID:ELItHfHU
>>74 Argument from Silence
Uncle is former magnet.
Haha, you guys are fucking silly, both emacs and vim are fucked up ultra-text-editors thats basically unusable without a second terminal open with a tutorial detailing how your supposed to open a file, save it and the close the so-called-text-editor. This tutorial i would ofcourse have open in nano or gedit if i wanted it graphical.
Name:
Absum2007-10-01 20:38 ID:rDOiJxWY
Should add that when programming i use geany...
minimalistic is for poor people
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-01 20:41 ID:WqFa9CRR
Haha, you guys are fucking silly, both emacs and vim are fucked up ultra-text-editors thats basically unusable without a second terminal open with a tutorial detailing how your supposed to open a file, save it and the close the so-called-text-editor.
Or you could spend 10 minutes or so actually learning to use your tools...
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-01 20:54 ID:gmMgomhz
>>79
You don't know him! He probably has some kind of memory disorder. Good thing he won't remember your unkind words.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-01 21:35 ID:WqFa9CRR
>>80
He's claiming to be a programmer. I wonder what his code looks like, if he can't remember how to type :wq or C-x-C-c?
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-02 1:47 ID:mgeDa+1n
What about those of use who learned and used both, and then moved on?
Well, actually if I have to spend time learning tools its a waste of time since there are tools thats just usable that's got all the functions I need...
ed has all the functions you need, why not use that?
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-02 8:33 ID:x/kIqphJ
>>87
I just took a look at the mined website. It looks like a huge step up from nano and pals, but... No macros? No regular expressions? No make support? It doesn't seem useful as a programming editor, though I'll certainly start recommending it to noobs for editing config files and HTML.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-02 11:16 ID:seRNZtTs
>>89
This is the reason you're no good at what you do.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-02 18:50 ID:X8MGFFr7
>>92
Can't be. I use vim, and I'm no good at what I do either.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-02 19:54 ID:x/kIqphJ
>>93
I believe >>92 was referring to >>89's attitude rather than his choice of editor.
I am looking forward to Google Wave. It's heart is a real-time collaborative environment. Imagine multiple coders working on the same source code files (if desired) at the same time. And it keeps full revision history which you can play back.
Name:
Anonymous2009-05-31 17:25
>>107
isn't that what mozilla is doing with bespin? What's the difference?
Name:
Anonymous2009-05-31 17:28
I am looking forward to Google getting us all hooked up on awesome, spiffy apps and webapps and then, all of a sudden, turning evil and managing to fuck everybody up the ass somehow.
Name:
Anonymous2009-05-31 17:59
>>109
Google will suddenly decide to charge for all its services such as gmail, picassa, google docs, & blogger.
You will completely lose access to your email, pictures, documents, or blog until you pay them enough ;)
Name:
Anonymous2009-05-31 18:03
>>107
You can already do the simultaneous editing with tools like SubEthaEdit and its clones.
Name:
Anonymous2009-05-31 19:14
>>110
I am Google the Micrapple. Pay me enough money and I will give you access to my secret area of your files.
>>114
That's because its original author wised up and switched to Emacs.
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-02 0:06
I find it interesting that Emacs users are supposed to be so smart yet their editor has, proportionally, been updated the least of all the editors since the dawn of computers.
This could be explained by one of following
* Those that use it are brainwashed already to think it's perfect how it is
* The users have better things to do than update their crappy editor
* None of them really knows how it works to update it
* No one actually uses it
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-02 0:19
>>116
That's actually not true. There's a retarded level of backwards compatibility with the pre-GUI versions (with all that that implies), but the editor has seen lots of overhauls in other regards. It wasn't until Visual Studio and Eclipse started to actually have a higher feature count that development slowed to a halt.
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-02 2:21
>>116
Emacs has LISP, therefore everything you need is already there.
You know that your editor is too fucking big when it has to be started in the background as a daemon and have a client version of the editor connect to it, just so it doesn't take 3 seconds to uncomment a line in a 50 byte text file. Emacs is like the adobe acrobat of editors.
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-02 4:33
>>122
You know you're doing it wrong when you close your editor.
>>122
Starting Microsoft Word (after all shared Office processes had been unloaded and the memory flushed) takes thrice more. Visual Studio and Eclipse take even more.
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-02 7:14
>>123
You know you're doing it wrong when you need to boot another operating system just to edit text files.
>>124
On my machine, Microsoft Word 2007 takes about 16 megabytes of physical memory (44 of virtual). Its startup time is just under one second. I have loaded some third party addons, which no doubt contribute to that negatively. Also, this version is noticeably more bloated than the old ones. In particular, 2002 (included with Office XP) was an incredible speed demon, with typical startup times of under a half second in the machine I had back then.
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-02 14:56
>>125
Real programmers use self-hosted Emacs as their only operating system.
anything that longer than 0.1 seconds to start is too slow.
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-02 20:10
>>132
I don't believe you. Are you sure it wasn't already running? A cold start takes one second on my Mac Pro. If you're like me, which is likely as we share a taste for this paragon of American engineering, you probably have about 12GB of RAM, and launch every application you might use at login. This is after all what the dock is all about - making it irrelevant whether an app is already running or not (at least for those of us who buy the best hardware to allow this paradigm to work as intended)
>>135
Am I supposed to fall for this? Trolls these days...
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-02 20:59
>>134 you probably have about 12GB of RAM, and launch every application you might use at login
That's exactly right.
But no, it wasn't already running. It was not really a ``cold start'', however, as I had just quit the running instance to perform the test, so most of its data was already cached. My test procedure was of course ``time open -a TextMate'', which measures the time from the initial launch request until TextMate calls [NSApp finishLaunching], the same action that stops the dock bounce.
This is all academic though, because in any sane universe one would already have TextMate running, at which point opening a file using the command-line client takes less than 0.1 seconds.
>>137
edit: It actually takes several tenths of a second after opening a file before the window is fully displayed. I can't measure that one. Forgive me.
This is all academic though, because in any sane universe one would already have TextMate running, at which point opening a file using the command-line client takes less than 0.1 seconds.
how do you run textmate on a headless server?
edit: It actually takes several tenths of a second after opening a file before the window is fully displayed. I can't measure that one. Forgive me.
and it's too slow to be useful.
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-02 21:31
>>136
I think you're getting delusional if you're finding trolls everywhere.
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-02 21:32
>>137
0.14 real 0.03 user 0.02 sys
on my $5000 Mac Pro with a $230 Velociraptor. Time to upgrade your main HD.
how do you run textmate on a headless server?
Use GNU's Not UNIX Nano for trivial config file edits, if that's the only sort of things you do on it, or set up MacFUSE and sshfs.
Use GNU's Not UNIX Nano for trivial config file edits, if that's the only sort of things you do on it,
why install a non-free toy editor when there's a real free editor already installed?
or set up MacFUSE and sshfs.
and transfer the whole file over the network when i open it and again when i save it? yeah, that's really going to take less than a tenth of second.
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-02 22:03
and transfer the whole file over the network when i open it and again when i save it? yeah, that's really going to take less than a tenth of second.
Yes, it probably will, unless you're connection is shit.
>>143
the server is halfway around the world.
it's not my connection that's shit, it's your shitty third-world country's connection that's shit.
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-02 22:14
>>144
Then a responsive editor will be better than a fast open/save time
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-02 23:00
>>141
My (fairly recent) experience with MacFUSE is that it crashes the fucking kernel whenever a filesystem driver doesn't respond properly. Which is beyond pathetic since half the reason for FUSE to exist is so we can avoid that kind of thing.
>>152
Yes. Additionally, I think that you're one of these annoying faggots who hate GNU license because once it's there, it's always there, and not for any actual reason.
I think that you're one of these annoying faggots who hate GNU license because once it's there, it's always there, and not for any actual reason.
You're wrong. I hate GNU licenses because half the license text is that idiotic preamble that contradicts the actual license terms, and because they claim that their proprietary license is a free software license and that real free software licenses aren't free.
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-03 0:21
The GPL is a trojan horse. Once you use it, RMS Mark Shuttleworth is free to change it, and leverage your project to wage his pathetic wars on whatever he feels like hating right now, like the American Republican party, or Javascript.
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-03 0:51
>>156
Smart people will remove the "or later" when they decide that a license like GPLv2 will be beneficial to their open source project, just like Lihnuss Thorwaltz did.
Vile, or Elvis, maybe even nvi. Anything but vim. Why? Because every time you run Vim, you risk orphans in Uganda getting a few pennies from donations... do you want that on your conscience?
>>164
Those pennies don't actually go to orphans. They go to condom manufacturers.
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-03 8:27
>>163
Possibly not today, but I don't see how it could have been done elsewise at the time and still have had any success. People aren't going to use a dog-slow kernel that spends half of its time context switching just because it's theoretically pretty.
Even today you hardly see people running out and installing Minix on their servers, now do you?
>>166
Yeah yeah, microkernels have greater overhead compared to other designs but in today's system, the overhead is completely acceptable in many situations. Microkernels are perfect for commodity general purpose systems such as PCs.
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-03 13:49
Microsoft SINGULARITY
Name:
EXPLAIN THIS ODD BEHAVIOUR2009-06-03 14:52
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
Why do the first 97 posters in this thread have IDs?
>>166
minix did just fine with a microkernel at the time.
the only reason linux was more popular then was that linux was free as in free beer and minix was not.