|
Geez, are there ANY decent text editors in Linux?
Ok, Ive used vi... sucks...
Everyone says, "Use Emacs!" So I tried it... again it sucks! Im trying to write JAVA code using emacs.... the dang editor keeps indenting my code! Man I hate it when a text editor ASSUMES that I want my code messed around with! Is there anyway to turn this "Auto Indent" nonsense off? |
ROFL
man vi, man emacs and feeding google would solve your problems. Personally I like vi (best editor ever!), but there are people who say the same about emacs. Both can be configured any way you like. I must admit that it takes a little while to get used to work with either of them, but once you get the hang of it........... ps: You could install wine and use notepad ;) |
The problem is that they turn these features ON by default!
It should be the other way around.... where I have to explicitly turn them ON, not try to figure out how to turn them off! |
Tastes differ, and they had to make a choice.
Like I stated before I'm a vi user, so I can only help you with Vi. Edit/make the .vimrc in your homedir (or /etc/vimrc if you want it for all users). Examples: - /usr/share/vim/vim61/vimrc_example.vim - http://www.vim.org/docs.php Hope this helps. |
joe is a plain and simple no frills editor....was my favorite until i joined the church of vi....plain as vi but a bit more user friendly
edit: i cannot spell to save my life..... |
for text-editing on the console, i use joe.
easy,plain-text editor. no whack commands or key-strokes as in vi I don't like vi or emacs, so i dont use them. I found joe to be much easier, and i am faster whit joe than whit vi or emacs but that's just my opinion...;) |
Bluefish is a powerful editor for experienced web designers and programmers. Bluefish supports many programming and markup languages, but it focuses on editing dynamic and interactive websites. See features for an extensive overview, take a look at the screenshots, or download it right away. Bluefish is an open source development project, released under the GPL licence.
Bluefish runs on most (all?) POSIX compatible operating systems including Linux, FreeBSD, MacOS-X, OpenBSD, Solaris and Tru64. Available from http://bluefish.openoffice.nl/ It reminds me a little about NoteTab for windows.... if you know that one |
This may ruffle some feathers but, are there any text editors that mimick Wordpad in Windows?
Im currenlty looking through the Help->Customize->Top Level Cusomtization Groups menu in EMacs (which is a nightmare by itself). There is a programming languages section... alas, there is no section for JAVA! |
On Redhat V9 there is "gedit" for the simpletons
|
Sorry, hope no one takes offense to my use of the word "simpleton", I meant to say for
people that like to keep things simple. I just looked up simpleton and it carries some derogatory connotations that I did not mean to imply |
Quote:
|
|
Ok... I downloaded, compiled, and am now running... Bluefish v.7 on my box... so far... GREAT.. FINALLY... No Nonsense editing in Linux!
After all, I just want to edit files, not set off a Nuclear weapon, for Christs sake! IMHO Emacs, and vi are like mental torture devices designed by Dr. Suess! Hay carrumba! |
Glad to have been of service :)
|
Thanks Nimoy
Live long and prosper... |
vi on the cli and kate in kde
|
Nobody here has recommended pico or nano yet :). Very easy to use too ;)
|
But Seriously... EMacs has to be THE WORST editor ever created by man!
Ahem... Its not a BUFFER... its a File... GEEZUUZZZ! Oh yeah... let me Switch Buffers!.... Uh....Crap! But there are those who swear by Emacs... Why you say? Simple.... Because human beings can get used to crap! It doesnt mean that it isnt crap... just because you are used to it! I mean DAMN.... I can get used to living in a Cave.... that doesnt make it the Taj Mahal! |
Pico is definitely better than EMACS... .Although Pico still makes the same mistake of calling a FILE a buffer.
Neither PICO, Emacs, or vi are better than EDIT in Windows! Linux needs an EDIT clone! Bluefish is good... BUT... it doesnt have a NON X version, so I cant use it from the command line when Im not running X.... sigh! |
Quote:
Why not write on yourself or hack the code of pico or emacs and change the text from "BUFFER" to "FILE"? |
JAVA programmers generally are so disordered...
Man! Identation is the key! |
If you held a gun to my head and told me to use vi, I would. I try, but it's a pain. If you held a gun to my head and told me to use EMACS, I'd say 'pull the trigger'. I tend to use joe like others have mentioned and I like nedit and gedit (simpleton here! ;) ) in X. Gedit for simple plain text editing sometimes, because it has tabs and nedit doesn't and sometimes I like tabs. Both are pretty straightforward editors. You don't need RH9 to get gedit - it's part of gnome and, if you've got the right libs, you can run it alone. I haven't found a simple tabbed text editor that isn't part of gnome or kde, which sucks, as I'd like to do without those apps entirely.
I don't know if you were serious about EDIT but, either way, you might want to give mcedit a try - it's part of the mc file manager and is a version of cooledit. mc and mcedit paid attention to what was going on in DOS. Cooledit's kinda funky imo, but mcedit's okay. Oh, and if you were seriously serious, just plug in dosemu and run EDIT, itself. As usual, you have no shortage of choices - finding anything worth choosing's the trick. One of these days I'll get the hang of vim, though. Maybe. Then again, people knock DOS for inflicting edlin on the world but it's a straight rip of ed - Unix is actually to blame for that one - and line editors are actually easier to use than EMACS or Vim, both of which are actually just multi-line editors rather than screen editors. They are immensely powerful but that doesn't change the fact that they are fundamentally primitive - their evolution is defined by inferior hardware and screwed up networking limitations that no PC editor has ever had to suffer from. So the step up from edlin was not to some multi-line weirdness but to a true screen editor like EDIT. That's an inferior implementation, but as other DOS and Windows editors show - and as all newer Linux apps demonstrate by *being* screen editors - it's a superior class. Developers and users just need to stop treating them as inferior based on the low demands of most users and the mystique of EMACS and vi. Things like NoteTabLight are extremely powerful screen editors. |
Quote:
I always indent my code. However, I do not want an editor to force me to do so in a manner in which the editor sees fit. Quote:
|
Ah. Well, I always found it a little *too* simple, though the Ctrl-P thing is sweet. :) Well, like I say, mcedit's not far removed and dosemu is an easy install - just grab the latest binary.
mcedit may try to indent you - I can't remember - but if it does, it's easily switched off, I think. And I agree with you - programs volunteering a lot of stuff I neither typed nor configured annoy me, too. |
Yep, I also hate cars that do that too!
Like some cars automatically unlock ALL the doors depending upon how you turn the key in the door lock! Whos DUMB idea was that? I call this kind of thing.... being "Technically Rude".... a person shouldnt be made to feel stupid by using a product. This is one area where Microsoft has made MAJOR contributions to the computing industry... the whole standardized look and feel, thing. |
Nano for console and BlueFish for X!!!
|
How about KWrite? Cool colours...indents only if you want it to indent...try it...personally i'd suggest using Emacs...it's a great IDE and what more, it's by Stallman himself...Vi is small, faster and easier...
|
Emacs is the worst editor ever created! It is so NOT user friendly! It has menu options that dont make sense....
For example.... the Files menu vs the Buffers menu... Shouldnt these just be 1 menu? What is it... a file or a buffer? Then... in the Buffers menu there is the List All Buffers option which PRINTS all of the "Buffers" to the screen! Dumb! Maybe the Authors of Emacs never heard about popup dialog windows? Again... Emacs is WAY too intrusive on the user... A good design would be to have it default to just a plain old text editor, then if the user desides to they can turn on options as they wish.... To the Author(s) of Emacs!... 1) Please study basic user friendly GUI design 101! 2) Learn what a popup dialog is! 3) Choose either File or Buffer terminology! Having both is very confusing! Ill make the choice for you... get rid of the Buffer terminology altogether! 4) Rearrange your menus so that they make sense! Customize, and Options DONT BELONG IN THE HELP MENU! Thanks. The Voice of Reason |
Quote:
|
Heck... Maybe I will just write an editor myself...
Does anyone know of any good Text based windowing libraries out there for C++? Thats where all of these editors EMacs, vi,joe,pico, nano, etc, are lacking... I WANT TO HIT ALT-F-X to exit the editor DAMMIT! I WANT THE EDITOR TO ASK THE RIGHT QUESTIONS! Instead of "Do you want to Lose your changes" I want the editor to ask "Do you want to Save" I WANT POPUP DIALOG BOXES! I WANT A FILE CALLED A FILE... NOT A BUFFER! I WANT MY STATUS BAR AT THE BOTTOM NOT THE TOP! INSTEAD OF ^O-WriteOut, I WANT ^S-Save INSTEAD OF ^W-Where is I WANT ^F-Find and ^R-Find/Replace and in Find/Replace I WANT TO SPECIFY TO REPLACE ALL CASE SENSITIVE! I WANT TO USE THE SAME EDITOR IN TEXT OR X MODE! Am I asking too much? |
I don't want to spoil your party, but do you actually now the difference between a buffer and a file (in this context)????
They are usefull and handy, but you do have to know how to use them. The gui issue's are personal. If you like gui's that much, you should have asked for a good gui editor for linux....... |
Well, that's a bit too much you are asking for :D
Like someone pointed out, you should go back to the basics and point out the difference between a buffer and a file...anyway, good luck if you are seriously writing an editor with all that stuff... |
Quote:
Emacs is not for you. Move on. Stop crying about it. |
Well said Strike, well said. I totally agree with you on this. Why do people ignore the good things and start crying about the stupid things that are absent? Why can't you just ignore the buffers, type in your stuff and save it to a file? Is it too hard to do? Is it too hard to type [ESC]:wq in Vi? I don't think so. Instead of saying that you don't have any `good' editors, why can't we modify Emacs or Vi the way we want? Come on man, we are not living in a perfect world!!! How can we have a perfect editor? Thank god we have Vim and Emacs...think of a world where you have a 'Micro$soft Frontpage' type of editor, generating all the ugly HTML...so, be happy with what you get, try to make it better and hey, don't forget to distribute the changes. Good Luck!!!
|
A long time ago, in an Operating System Far, Far Away....
There were IDE's that were text based GUI's (Borland Turbo C, Pascal, etc) These tools provided clear menu driven editing, compiling, debugging.... simple... You didnt need to read a book, or take a course to learn how to use them, why? because they were WELL DESIGNED, text based IDE's. The editors in Linux are either Over simplified with very few features (joe,pico,etc) or Over complicated (Emacs) or Only X based (Bluefish). Linux CRIES OUT for a user friendly, menu driven, text based editor, that does compilation.... Youre right... Emacs is too horrible to correct. In order to get Emacs to where it is user friendly, you would have to scrap it and start over. This is real simple.... take an old DOS, Text based, menu driven, version of Turbo Pascal, and port it to linux, and make it compile C, JAVA, or Whatever. Like I said, if I find a good text based windowing library for Linux, Ill write it myself! Maybe ncurses library will do? Ill call it OOPICEDIT. If Emacs, and vi are so cool for developers... Wheres the Project Management facilities? |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Alex |
Quote:
Both of those are strictly X based, so they cant truly compete with emacs or vi which are text based. Hello... is this thing on? Quote:
You dont need the source code to port the look, feel, and functionality of an application. You shouldnt need to read a book, just to get up and running with an editor! I didnt need a book to learn to use Bluefish! The only problem with Bluefish is that its not text based, only X. |
hell, I don't understand this guy..one minute he says he wants a editor with all those popup messages and then complains that Bluefish is for X. I think you should make up your mind...and Ilama is right as ever..use Anjuta or KDevelop(I like Anjuta personally). And yes, wake up and check out the documentation for Emacs...it is one of the best free-source IDEs available...
|
Quote:
I should give it a try again. I've never run it under Linux. -- Ugh. That is one long compile. Pretty cool, though. |
Quote:
NOW WE ARE COOKING WITH GAS! See, I knew I wasnt crazy, there must have been someone else who recognized how weak all the other editors are! Setedit is what I was thinking of! Simple, clear, concise... Windowed, Text based editor! Dont need a book to understand this! I compiled and installed it... (took me a while to get a version that would work on my Suse 7.3 install) TVision is the library I was thinking of too... a C++ wrapper around ncurses... Man... its like pulling teeth for crying out loud.... Thanks Digiot! |
No.
There are no decent text editors in linux. Use something else. |
Now... I do like setedit....
However, there are a couple of things missing.... that would make it THE perfect editor for programmers.... The one thing is... Id like to have a command window, instead of shelling out to the command prompt.... You know... I could pop up a command window from inside the editor, and execute commands.... But thats only a small thing.... Where is the support for compiling/debugging C/C++/Java/etc? If you take the SetEdit design, and add the above things... you will have the PERFECT editor for programmers. Just to make something clear.... I dont have a problem with EMacs FUNCTIONALITY.... it is very, functional...with tons of features. However, I do have a problem with its PRESENTATION of its functionality... If you take the functionality of Emacs, and PRESENT it in a setedit manner.... you will have the best editor for programmers ever made by man. |
If you're looking for a CLI text editor, I'd recommend you nano or mcedit, which is a part of mc (Midnight Commander).
|
Yeah, looking over it again, it does seem to be somewhat lacking in a tiny spot or two. It's got a great mp3 player, though. :rolleyes: How are you even shelling out? The only thing I can see for compiling/debugging support is writing macros to run programs in the Macro menu or hitting ctrl-f9 after configuring the program to run in Options. The search continues.
I have a problem with emacs functionality - same thing as having mp3 players - it's just got too much junk and tries to do too much. Info viewer and file manager and games and a friggin' psychiatrist. It's ridiculous. But in terms of actual editor functions, I see what you're saying. (And, in all fairness to setedit, in DOS, you can never pack too much miscellaneous functionality, such as mp3 players, into an app because of the single-tasking. There's no explanation for emacs except an aversion to quitting the program or a lack of comprehension of job control. Emacs tries to own you, basically, and get in the way of the entire freaking OS.) Vim really is great - it's probably the perfect editor, really, except that it's too concerned with vi-compatibility and it suffers from that presentation thing. It's just a pain in the @$$ to use. Repeat after me: I am not on a 200-baud modem connecting to a mainframe from a dumb terminal with 6 keys on the keyboard. |
Geee what is wrong?
We always see the vi vs emacs war, but this is even worse.. vi and emacs are both very powerful, and are not simple text editors (well some might argue that vi is : ) As always, there is a tradeoff for the additional power, and that is the learning curve, initial setup etc. I wont talk for vi since I am an emacs user. With emacs, it requires some time to configure for your personal tastes. Every aspect of the editor is configurable and it has a LOT of power. There is no 'simple' way to make all these features available to the user unless every user wants the same set of features and behaviour, but we dont, we want our own... But when you have your setup, its easy to take your emacs files (.emacs etc) to any other machine running emacs, and yazza you have your pre configured emacs ready to run! I think some people in this thread need to spend a little more time (its called an investment) to get over the learning curve of these two editors, they are very popular for a reason, and that is because they are powerful! Regarding indenting: You can configure emacs to do your indenting just how you like it! or turn it off or do what ever you like... just my 8 cents. Cheers |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I dont know how long emacs has been around, but its designers should have looked around at IDE's that were already out there.... |
Quote:
|
Setedit... is a good start for an excellent Linux editor for programmers. It just needs more of the IDE stuff....
Maybe Ill modify the source code in the version Im running. I definitely like setedit more than vi! the main problem with vi is that the designers didnt seem to know what a menu is! At least joe, and pico developers knew what the concept of a menu is...! Ha, ha, ha... |
Quote:
And now I know what to call it. Investment! Thank you. Quote:
----- I get really sick of everything that *sucks* about Linux being yawned at and diagnosed as PEBKAC. You know, sometimes things are just really stupidly designed or outdated - designed well but malformed by limitations that no longer exist - or more frigging trouble than they're worth. As strange as that may seem. |
Quote:
And people who give this crap about vim's 'hjkl' being 'efficient' - 'jkl;' might arguably be efficient. hjkl is just stupid. But neither one is as good as the wordstar diamond. And it's debatable if the efficiency lost to cursor keys outweighs the efficiency in reduced brain noise while you're running the thing, not to mention 'learning curve'. Plus, errors are *hugely* costly on vim or emacs - errors on DOS/Win-style editors tend to cost a simple backspace. And the damn backspace key actually *backs* up a *space* by default! Crazy, I know, but there you have it. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:53 PM. |