LinuxQuestions.org
LinuxAnswers - the LQ Linux tutorial section.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > LinuxQuestions.org > 2006 LinuxQuestions.org Members Choice Awards
User Name
Password
2006 LinuxQuestions.org Members Choice Awards This forum is for the 2006 LinuxQuestions.org Members Choice Awards.
You can now vote for your favorite products of 2006. This is your chance to be heard! Voting ends February 18th.

Notices



Poll: Text Editor of the Year
Poll Options
Text Editor of the Year

You must log in and have one post to vote in this poll. If you don't have an account, you can register here.
Results will be available after the polls close.

The nominees are:

vi/vim
emacs/xemacs
Kate
jEdit
nano
pico
gedit
Nedit
joe
Scite
Midnight Commander Editor
KWrite

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 01-04-2007, 08:26 AM   #61
dragonbite
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jun 2005
Location: New England, USA
Distribution: CentOS( & Ubuntu .. formerly Gentoo and RH
Posts: 5

Rep: Reputation: 0
what about Mousepad


What about Mousepad with Xfce?
 
Old 01-04-2007, 11:42 AM   #62
zyghom
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Posts: 6

Rep: Reputation: 0
vim with cream of course
 
Old 01-04-2007, 12:21 PM   #63
animeresistance
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 192

Rep: Reputation: 20
vi, Kate and gedit are always good for me
 
Old 01-04-2007, 12:40 PM   #64
anticapitalista
Member
 
Registered: May 2005
Location: Greece
Distribution: antiX using herbstluftwm, i3, wmii, fluxbox, icewm and jwm.
Posts: 305

Rep: Reputation: 68
nano for console
Nedit for gui
 
Old 01-04-2007, 02:12 PM   #65
sarah79
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jan 2007
Location: York, UK
Distribution: OpenSUSE
Posts: 1

Rep: Reputation: 0
Nano for console
Kate for GUI
or when it really goes wrong then vi
 
Old 01-04-2007, 06:09 PM   #66
frob23
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2004
Location: Roughly 29.467N / 81.206W
Distribution: Ubuntu, FreeBSD, NetBSD
Posts: 1,449

Rep: Reputation: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by xenocoder
:g/emacs/s/emacs/vi/g
Wouldn't that be easier with:
Code:
:g/emacs/s//vi/g
or
:%s/emacs/vi/g


Just FYI, you don't need to repeat the previous search with s/, if you use // it defaults to the last search. This can be a real time saver (it works with all searches not just g/).

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganoo
What can you possibly mean by saying that Emacs doesn't look good??? Emacs looks absolutely gorgeous!

See the screenshot of Emacs here:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Emacs-GTK.png
Great, now I can combine the clean efficiency of GTK with the tiny executable size of emacs! There's nothing like having an infinite amount of core and CPU for common editing tasks.

Now, let me fire this up on my Sparcstation10, and then run and get a cup of coffee ... from Columbia ... by the time I get back it might be displaying something.

Last edited by frob23; 01-04-2007 at 06:12 PM.
 
Old 01-04-2007, 08:04 PM   #67
Eternal_Newbie
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2005
Location: The Pudding Isles
Distribution: Slackware 13.37
Posts: 573

Rep: Reputation: 59
gvim for X11
pico for terminal
how's that for strange?
 
Old 01-04-2007, 10:56 PM   #68
taylor_venable
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2005
Location: Indiana, USA
Distribution: OpenBSD, Ubuntu
Posts: 892

Rep: Reputation: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by frob23
Great, now I can combine the clean efficiency of GTK with the tiny executable size of emacs! There's nothing like having an infinite amount of core and CPU for common editing tasks.

Now, let me fire this up on my Sparcstation10, and then run and get a cup of coffee ... from Columbia ... by the time I get back it might be displaying something.
Eight Megabytes and Constantly Swapping. Of course, if you have to write everything in assembly to get it to run efficiently on your machine, Emacs probably isn't for you. But in actuality, Lisp is now fairly efficient when it comes to CPU speed (see the language shootout), it's just memory use that's high. In addition, the graphical functions are all written in C (so is the interpreter kernel).

Assuming you use a computer that's less than six years old, Emacs handily gives you a lot of functionality you can't get anywhere else, plus extensibility that can't be beat. (I wrote a minor mode yesterday that allows you to specify electric keywords which trigger execution of elisp functions; the keywords can be specified globally or based on current major mode.) It's true that typing is the fastest part of programming, but anything that speeds the process up is welcome in my book.

Strange to see a lot of people on here proclaiming the awesomeness of Mousepad, which as far as I can tell is nothing more than MSFT Notepad for XFCE. Is that a fair assessment? (Really, I'm curious.) If it is, why use a text editor that offers you basically no features?

Another thing I'm curious about is why people use vi or Vim. True that it uses less memory than Emacs, but is it noticeably faster? And do you really need to conserve memory that much? Does not your web browser or email client use much more memory than the difference between Vim and Emacs? As a benchmark for comparison, my copy of Emacs (including email support) which has been operating in various modes all days (including reading email) is using at the moment 47204K of memory. As I have 1024M of RAM, I don't consider this a detriment (0.5% of the total available); but what do other LQers think?

No, I'm not trying to start a fight. My primary interest in computing science is programming language design, and one of the big barriers to the adoption of languages like Lisp or other functional languages is how much memory they use and the (sometimes incorrect) conception that they're slow. Since Emacs vs. Vim is especially representative of the same arguments involved in the functional vs. imperative language scene, I'm wondering what sort of feedback editor users have.
 
Old 01-04-2007, 11:27 PM   #69
bonefry
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Posts: 7

Rep: Reputation: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by taylor_venable
Another thing I'm curious about is why people use vi or Vim. True that it uses less memory than Emacs, but is it noticeably faster? And do you really need to conserve memory that much? Does not your web browser or email client use much more memory than the difference between Vim and Emacs? As a benchmark for comparison, my copy of Emacs (including email support) which has been operating in various modes all days (including reading email) is using at the moment 47204K of memory. As I have 1024M of RAM, I don't consider this a detriment (0.5% of the total available); but what do other LQers think?
I started with Emacs, but I finally settled for VIM (vi is not enough for me).
And it got nothing to do with memory usage or speed.

I prefer VIM because:

1) it has nicer shortcuts (personal taste) ... and I really like those editing modes. It made me much more efficient at editing text in the first 24 hours, then Emacs did in the first week

2) Emacs needs a lot of customizations to work after my taste ... and the out of the box experience really sucks.

3) VIM is more integrated with the underlying platforms that it runs on (this might change in the next Emacs versions).

4) Although Emacs Lisp is a nice language, VIM has bindings for Ruby, Perl and Python, thus I can write plugins in languages that I already know.

Quote:
Originally Posted by taylor_venable
Since Emacs vs. Vim is especially representative of the same arguments involved in the functional vs. imperative language scene, I'm wondering what sort of feedback editor users have.
No, actually you've got it all wrong.
People choose VIM over Emacs, and vice-versa, mostly because of personal preference and taste.

I like VIM better than Emacs, but that's just a matter of taste, and if it weren't for VIM, I would be using Emacs right now.
 
Old 01-05-2007, 03:10 AM   #70
tcn03u
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Location: Nottingham
Distribution: Redhat 9, Fedora Core 2, Mandrake 10, Mandriva 2005-2008, chinhnt2k3
Posts: 26

Rep: Reputation: 15
KWrite for a noob like me
 
Old 01-05-2007, 05:39 AM   #71
kamran_pro
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Posts: 28

Rep: Reputation: 15
vim 7 is a divine blessing from God.
 
Old 01-05-2007, 07:47 AM   #72
frob23
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2004
Location: Roughly 29.467N / 81.206W
Distribution: Ubuntu, FreeBSD, NetBSD
Posts: 1,449

Rep: Reputation: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by taylor_venable
Another thing I'm curious about is why people use vi or Vim. True that it uses less memory than Emacs, but is it noticeably faster? And do you really need to conserve memory that much? Does not your web browser or email client use much more memory than the difference between Vim and Emacs? As a benchmark for comparison, my copy of Emacs (including email support) which has been operating in various modes all days (including reading email) is using at the moment 47204K of memory. As I have 1024M of RAM, I don't consider this a detriment (0.5% of the total available); but what do other LQers think?

No, I'm not trying to start a fight. My primary interest in computing science is programming language design, and one of the big barriers to the adoption of languages like Lisp or other functional languages is how much memory they use and the (sometimes incorrect) conception that they're slow. Since Emacs vs. Vim is especially representative of the same arguments involved in the functional vs. imperative language scene, I'm wondering what sort of feedback editor users have.
47,204K! That's a lot considering my copy of vi here is using 1,932K. We're talking over 24 times the amount of memory. Sure, memory is "cheap" these days but I still can't see the point of wasting it all for a text editor. And, for me, using vi is noticeably faster since I'm not always trying to find the M- or C- keys in the middle of editing tasks. It also loads virtually instantly on my system and that's without hacks to keep one instance running that catches new attempts to open it to speed up initialization.

And for a lot of people, memory is not cheap. I have a couple systems with less than 96M and a few more with less than 256M. Using 20-50% of my memory on an editor is crazy.

Also, a usability of computer languages, in the past, has shown that the verboseness of a language does not make it easier to use. Terse languages are just as easy to use and understand. The same can be extended to editing. Once you know what you want, the less typing you have to do the better since it's the same amount of mental effort. The less I have to move my fingers to get a job done, the faster it gets done. And once you are proficient with vi, you can do things which blow other people's minds. There's hardly a lack of functionality -- even in straight vi and without the additional vim stuff.

I happen to love Lisp and prototype code with it frequently. I'm not making the claim that Lisp is slow or bulky. And I'll even use emacs when editing Lisp because I can combine it with Slime to make a Lisp IDE. I really don't see how the two compare when it comes to the appeal of editing though. Not all Lisp programmers like emacs... or emacs lisp... just because that's the language you can extend it in.
 
Old 01-05-2007, 08:23 AM   #73
ChaoticSoul
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jan 2007
Location: Belgium
Distribution: Debian GNU/Linux
Posts: 4

Rep: Reputation: 0
Pico all the way!

I use it everywhere...whether I'm in a console environment or GNOME.
 
Old 01-06-2007, 06:49 PM   #74
JMJ_coder
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2006
Distribution: Fedora
Posts: 478

Rep: Reputation: 30
Hello,

I have done an exhaustive search of text editors in the past year. While many have nice features, and are a pleasure to use, not one of them has come close to comparing with VIM for general (and some specialized) use.
 
Old 01-06-2007, 07:11 PM   #75
teckk
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2004
Distribution: FreeBSD Arch
Posts: 1,773

Rep: Reputation: 197Reputation: 197
Gedit for GUI, and ee for CLI. (ee is found on BSD)
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Text Editor of the Year jeremy 2005 LinuxQuestions.org Members Choice Awards 150 05-23-2009 10:40 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:17 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration