From: mschulter AT mach1 DOT s-cc DOT com () Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: Text editors Date: 16 Jan 1997 20:10:28 GMT Organization: S&C Communictions Lines: 57 Message-ID: <5bm1vk$l0f@news.s-cc.com> References: <32D332BD DOT AAD AT dmv DOT com> <32d3c8d0 DOT 60903091 AT redwood DOT cs DOT sc DOT edu> <32D4884E DOT 3AD3 AT novia DOT net> <5b64bj$lbc AT whitbeck DOT ncl DOT ac DOT uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: mach1.s-cc.com To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp T.W. Seddon (T DOT W DOT Seddon AT ncl DOT ac DOT uk) wrote: : Dead_and_gone (alaric AT novia DOT net) wrote: : > Am I the only person who uses vi? : Heh, 'vi' may be hard to use and without handy djgpp-like features, but I : think that I can maybe go one better... ;-) : Am I the only person who uses MS-DOS Edit? : I think I've tried every editor on Simtel and quite a few more (maybe about : 100 or so!) and *not one* is as good as DOS Edit. (Although its replacement : of tabs by 4 spaces is very annoying.) If my choice offends anyone then tell : me a better editor and I'll use it! : -- : --Tom First, please let me say after reading some less graceful comparative threads that I find it strange that any user would be offended because someone somewhere might be having a good time -- or a productive programming session -- with a different editor . Variety is the spice of life. Thus I take the question not as whose editor is best, but why a given user prefers a given editor, and I'm delighted to explain my preference for GNU Emacs (32-bit DOS version). First, I love not only the Compile option for C, but the Shell Command option with its macro support for editing a PostScript language illustration, pressing a single function key, and automatically saving the file, running an interpreter to generate a displayable preview image, viewing that image in graphics mode with another program, and then returning to Emacs to refine the code further. After a dozen or three edit/preview cycles in creating an illustration or maybe debugging a PostScript procedure for use in lots of illustrations, I know why Emacs is fun -- and before trying Emacs, I had used Norton Editor for over six years (and I still use it for batch file editing and the like). As someone using a monochrome monitor (or a halftone monitor from a PostScript standpoint, maybe a "unified imaging model for display and printer" ), I don't get the benefit of syntax highlighting -- but the automatic indentation features of Emacs not only make it easy to write more attractively formatted code but can help in finding errors. The integration between Emacs and GCC is also a big plus -- brought to us by DJGPP. The Emacs docs and the built-in Info are also entertaining as well as helpful, and I haven't heard of any other editor with that unique RMS touch (initials standing, of course, for Richard M. Stallman, the once, current, and future arch-developer of this collective effort). This certainly is not to put down anyone who prefers vi, DOS edit, Brief, or any other alternative -- and it may be to prove why it's good that I use DOS, because at least the file name system gives me practice now and then in the virtue of brevity . May peace and diversity flourish, Margo Schulter mschulter AT mpu DOT com