Nano. I rarely do any serious editing/code crunching so syntax highlighting and what not is really lost on me.

I choose pico because in addition to using Ubuntu 64bit (On my Hpo Pavilion a6230n) I just recntly started using FreeBSD and pico is comes ona typical FreeBSD 7.0 installation.

VI 'til I die!!!!!

STANDARD *NIX EDITOR!!! WRONG!!!

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Emacs has been replaced by a shell script which 1) Generates a syslog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:

golem> ed

?
help
?
?
?
quit
?
exit
?
bye
?
hello?
?
eat flaming death
?
^C
?
^C
?
^D
?

---
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!!!



(From emacs/etc/JOKES file)


(As you may guess, I actually use emacs-cvs-latest )

I use many text editors, more than have even been mentioned as of the time that I writing this note. When doing a lot of editing, I use GNU Emacs the most.

For light editing in a notepad style I use Leafpad.

For touch typing or quick editing I use a variety of Vi based editors to keep my fingers vi nimble. Levee is the smallest of them all, Vim/Gvim is arguably the most flexible and capable of them all.

For simple console editing I use nano, but I also like joe a lot - I can make it have the keypad feel of several different editors.

For a faster Emacs, I sometimes use MicroEmacs.

There are many editors that I like for many reasons, but I keep coming back to GNU Emacs as my full featured editor of preference. I can use it with any number of keypad styles, even the vi style. I can read news, Email, documentation, even browse the Web. While I do not always use it in all of those ways, I can, and I've done so many times. I have yet to find any editing task that I cannot do with it.

nano, kate if i am doing coding or checking code though

oh, an emacs fan.

from wikipedia:

You can't beat emacs for sheer power, but I use Kate and bash which jointly let me do everything emacs does in a more convenient format.

If I am not working from X, I'll go for emacs ahead of VI anytime. VI reminds me too much of the old RT-11 text editor. I never did like it. Give me a full screen editor anytime.

It would be interesting to see how many votes are for Gnu Emacs, VI, and Vim.

When I'm in cli, I use mc, anybody remember that?
In gui, I personally use scite, its small but packs a nice punch.

Yea, noted. I don't know what Jeremy's on to with this one.

Minor correction, of global importance...

:1,$ s/^MS//g

;-)

I voted for NANO, never learned vi or emacs...

I've probably used like a hundred editors. From ed and edlin to the dos edit and many others. In the university I mostly used vi, pico and nedit (I loved that one though admittedly it no longer suits me).

Since then (and many years have passed) I haven't really found MY editor of choice. For one reason or another they all bother me in one or another way. I have used both vim and emacs for years (though I am not an expert in either of them, I don't enjoy them so my interest in learning anything besides what I need to be proficient is next to nil). In command line I always end using nano (or mcedit each time nano triggers one of its many silly bugs). When I need to do serious work I used to use kate, but kde is getting to a point that the daying daemons will not let me do my job, and I have lots lots of hours a couple of weeks ago. So kate is no longer for me. I've used bluefish (not listed in the poll) in the past, and it was good for code and html editing, but there's nothing really special about it. Right now I am using geany (not in the list either by the way) for no particular reason.

I am constantly looking for a better text editor. I guess it's my fate.

For speed and ease of use it has to be Vim.
(I've never been able to gain any speed in an editor that does not have a command mode.)

I particularly use the feature of highlighting all occurrences of a word / phrase to check where it occurs and see incidence patterns.

I've tried to get going with emacs many times - but the initial learning curve is far too steep.
I can see the potential power and love the range of add-ons available - but it's a bit like learning to juggle when you have to start with four balls.