Anyone use BBEdit?

[xsphat]

I have an old freeware copy, but I have not used the newest release. I have BBEdit Lite 6.1.2, and it doesn't use any of the Unix shrotcuts I am used to. Does the new one use them?

I just have this copy because it can open anything - even corrupt text documents.

[xsphat]

Or maybe JEdit?

[Whiskey in the Jar-o]

Or maybe JEdit?

I don't think JEdit is updated much these days. The creator is no longer involved with it. It's written in Java, so wouldn't be blazingly fast. VIM is a safe choice, IMO, for the simple reason that it's everywhere. OK, that's a bit of an exaggeration, but vi certainly is everywhere. It seems that Emacs is great if you are prepared to sink a lot of time into it and customize the heck out of it. Which means you'd have to bring along your customization file to use somebody else's emacs installation. It seems that pretty much everyone who uses Emacs, customizes it heavily. You can easily extend Vim, but most people tend to use it as is i.e. with default key bindings. There are also heaps of plugins for both, of course.

[iMav]

I'm a pretty frequent vi user.  But my text-editing needs aren't that great.  Edit a config file here, whip up a script there.  Nothing too demanding.

[xsphat]

I way prefer the the cursor movement shortcuts in Emacs, and Mac OS X has a bunch of them built in since it's Unix, but they don't tell people that.

I never gave Vi or Vim much of a chance. I am not a coder, I am a writer, but I like to work with text without the mouse, so that is why I use coder's text editors. Plus, I really like the idea of "clean text," because after I have my documents, I can do anything I want with no stupid attributes added - just my text.

When you open a Terminal window is OS X, you can change it to Emacs, Vi or Pico just by typing the name and hitting return, so I have played with all of them and I jsut like Emacs the best.

[iMav]

When you open a Terminal window is OS X, you can change it to Emacs, Vi or Pico just by typing the name and hitting return.

[xsphat]

Does Linux do that to? I know Windows XP doesn't (or I haven't figured out how).

[Whiskey in the Jar-o]

Does Linux do that to? I know Windows XP doesn't (or I haven't figured out how).

What happens is that you are actually launching a terminal application. So you can launch whatever editor you want. I'm using Ubuntu Linux, and AFAIK, it doesn't come with emacs installed. Note that emacs is usually used in graphical mode. I think by default OS X has only text mode emacs installed i.e. you can only run it within the terminal.

The other thing is the command-line editing mode of your terminal. Emacs key bindings are the most common default. So for example

someprompt>cp A B

You move to the end of the line by pressing C-e, to the beginning by pressing C-a. Etc..

However, you can put you command-line in vi mode:

someprompt>set -o vi

Then the equivalent would be Esc, followed by 0 to get to the start of the line, $ to get to the end. Etc..

set -o gives you the current shell settings. set -o emacs puts you back into posix.

The main reason I'm not into emacs is that it's a modeless editor.  I hate chording multiple keys for the most trivial things. Vim is a modal editor, so you just get yourself into command mode, and almost all commands from then do not require modifier keys.

In conclusion... Emacs is probably best for writing non-programming text.

[iMav]

In conclusion... Emacs is probably best for writing non-programming text.

Well, emacs IS extremely popular among programmers.  I don't think I've ever seen a lisp programmer use anything else.   :wink:

[Whiskey in the Jar-o]

In conclusion... Emacs is probably best for writing non-programming text.

Well, emacs IS extremely popular among programmers.  I don't think I've ever seen a lisp programmer use anything else.   :wink:

Of course, but I think as far as programming editors used for non-programming work, emacs has vi beat.  After all emacs is really an OS.   BTW, Paul Graham is a famous lisp hacker. He uses vi.

[iMav]

BTW, Paul Graham is a famous lisp hacker. He uses vi.

touche!  

Admittedly, I have little experience with Emacs.  But all of my more prolific programming friends swear by it.

[Whiskey in the Jar-o]

BTW, Paul Graham is a famous lisp hacker. He uses vi.

touche!  

Admittedly, I have little experience with Emacs.  But all of my more prolific programming friends swear by it.

I think it's a matter of preference. At the start of the year I decided to learn a proper editor once and for all, and the following reasons swayed me:

1) vi is everywhere.
2) no need to heavily customize vi.
3) I prefer modes to chording. vi commands are very brief thanks to modes.
4) absolutely the ugliest fonts in emacs. No anti-aliased, true-type fonts available. I believe this has changed recently in Xemacs, but it's too late for me now. Bitstream Vera Sans Mono is the ultimate programming font for Linux.

[iMav]

You definitely don't have to sell me on vi.  It's been my preferred text editor for over a decade.  (long time UNIX admin)

I actually found myself on a UNIX system one time that did NOT have vi.  The only editor available to be was ed.  That too is a mode-based editor...but I advise against using it.  (although if you are a UNIX admin, it is good to know the basic functionality so that you can use it in a pinch)