Web Development Editor of the Year
 

What is your web editor of choice?

--jeremy

NVU! I prefer HTML coding, but even still, a dreamweaver clone

Quanta gets my vote because of the CSS editor but Bluefish came a close second.

Quanta by a mile, Bluefish is alright. Nvu is horribly buggy and uses a slow XUL toolkit.

Quanta is my editor of choice simply because of its convenient auto-completion of HTML code and PHP coding assistance and its advanced CSS editor.

Bluefish, from their website

Bluefish, I don't like WYSIWYG apps

Bluefish for sure.

Bluefish

for the reasons Alien_Hominid point out.

Quanta. KIO-Slaves and features others have already pointed out make it a winner for me.

While I use Bluefish and like it very much, I feel that NVU has evolved at an impressive rate in recent years, so it deserves to be the app of the year.

I have to give it up to nvu development.

NVU may still need a lot of work, but a WYSIWYG editor is just so much more natural for such a visual medium as web design...

still sticking with quanta

Quanta by far and away, although I have to say that Seamonkey produces some fairly clean HTML as far as WYSIWYG editors go.

Another vote for Quanta, any free Win32 equivalent?;)

http://www.xored.com/trustudio -> trustudio's 'foundation' php plugin for eclipse :)

I vote for vim.

emacs + xhtml.dtd + psgml.el + xml-mode

Nvu is great!

Not listed, but Kate is mine. :)

Quanta is the most stable and feature-full one that I have used from that list. To say Nvu was rubbish would be a bit of an understatement...

I prefer to code everything by hand... And use jEdit for all my web dev needs :)

Nvu is nice; could use some improvements such as better PHP coding support

Would it be fair to list amaya as well?
Anyhow, if a newbie read this thread this will be one more idea to look at.

Quanta fer shure!
 

One more vote for Quanta.

I do (g)vim all the way!

Kate, but bluefish makes an ok second. I never use it though.

I really like NVU, true it could use some improvements, especially in the code formatting area, but I really like it, and to refine all that I do with it, I use good ol' vim.

I still haven't found anything designed to hasten the process of hand-coding better than Screem. Yet, nobody else seems to have mentioned it yet. Am I ignorant of Bluefish and Quanta developments in the past year? Or has no one else tried Screem yet?

FYI Quanta uses Kate as its editor, but adds a LOT more memu options for text manipulation. The only thing that Kate/Quanta is missing that I REALLY need is macros.

Quanta. Simply for PHP and it's great CSS editor.

NetBeans 5.0...

If I were able to use it in Linux, I'd say TopStyle Pro. But, alas...

I tried Quantro and found it lacking. Tried Bluefish and Screem. I'm back with Quantro.

TopStyle Pro runs very, very well under wine. :)

Seems like the Bluefish users think that you **have to** develop WYSIWYG when using Quanta+ otherwise they wouldn't have made the comments they did. Quanta allows you to develop both in code (not just HTML, but PHP, perl, even straight text) as well as WYSIWYG. Quanta+ has so many more useful features that there are only two reason not to use it:

1. You haven't seen all of the features.
2. You are so used to something else that you don't want to spend the time learning Quanta+.

If you look at it in terms of ease of use, number of very useful features and extensibility it is really had to see what someone would want to use anything else.

Emacs? Where is Emacs???

Cool! I had not used quanta before, and did not know that it used kate-part. I will check it out. About the macros though... it will happen eventually... hopefully.

Quanta is my current editor of choice. Though, I usually use straight HTML (no PHP, CSS, etc) so I simply use Kate.

Quanta all the way.

I've tried them all and it's still Vim. Vim. Vim. :p

What do you mean by "macro". I am not trying to be pendantic here, it's just that the term "macro" often has different meanings in different contexts. I can create an Action that inputs text blocks, wraps selected text around the selected text, sends the selected text or the whole file through an external script (i.e.perl) and the replaces the selection with the output of the script and so forth.

What is it that you want to do?

I'm talking about a playback/record feature. Being able to script an action (which technically is a macro, but not in the classic application sense) is fine and all, but it's so time consuming in comparison to TextPad's recording of a couple of actions, then you can go back and edit it to tweak it if you like, and then you can run it against the selection, play through to the end of file, or repeat (n) number of times. All without wasting time writing the skeleton of the script.

In some cases scripting is by far the superior solution,but when it comes to macros, which are intended to save time, having to stop and write code to manipulate your code (or tabular data, or whatever) is idiotic as coding the macro by hand can often take longer than simply editing the text by hand.

Macros
 

What do you mean about macros? Quanta supports code snippets in a various way (actions or abbreviations). If you talk about scriptability, then you can write scripts to modify the content of the document(s) with the DCOP interfaces provided by Quanta and the Kate part.

I don't know about such feature in whole KDE and I believe this should not be application specific, but something provided by the base libraries.

gedit, with HTML, CSS syntax highlighting. It is't even a choice :(

quanta - still the best w.reg. to php support - which else offers integrated php-debugger (gubed) ?

I really want to say gvim...

I'll say NVU..making strides with Linspire(?) behind it now...it was drowning as Mozilla Composer...

Quanta+
 

or kate, for the quickies.

Bluefish is worthless as a project editor and NVU is just too buggy. Quanta would run this category over if it wasn't for its memory usage. Overall though Quanta wins out.

Bobby