[Q] textEditor of choice

[John Beppu]

I've been programming in dos for a little bit, and I had come to
the decision that Qedit was about as good as it gets when it comes
to DOS-based text-editors. However, it seems that a lot of people
love Emacs, and I'm unfamiliar with it, so I was hoping someone
could tell me what is so wonderful about Emacs.

Sorry this wasn't DJGPP related, but I figured this would not be
too much to ask.

--
be...@ea.oac.uci.edu

[Justin Frankel]

Paul Mills (pmi...@capecod.net) wrote:
: In article <4hgnfn$k...@news.service.uci.edu>,
: be...@arcturus.oac.uci.edu (John Beppu) wrote:
: >
: > I've been programming in dos for a little bit, and I had come to

: > the decision that Qedit was about as good as it gets when it comes
: > to DOS-based text-editors. However, it seems that a lot of people
: > love Emacs, and I'm unfamiliar with it, so I was hoping someone
: > could tell me what is so wonderful about Emacs.

: Emacs is powerful and extensible -- and hard to use. Try Boxer
: (DOS-based,download from a Simtel* site), or PFE(windows, also from Simtel)

: * e.g. oak.oakland.edu

: Good luck,
: Paul

I'd have to say VI is the best. :)

Justin

[Alex Schroeder]

Comparing QEdit and Emacs:

I am using Emacs on my account, and it works fine. I tried Emacs at
home and syntax editing etc. are wonderfull, too. But configuring the
entire keyboard would take me hours. One user claimed that it only
takes you 1 hour to do everything QEdit does. It took me longer, and
it still doesn't do all of it. It took me hours only to change the
color codings and to configure the hilite package.

And since Emacs on my DOS machine (486 DX/33, 4MB RAM) loads slowly, I
end up by not using it and prefering the not-so-powerfull, but small
and fast QEdit.

OTOH Emcas is not shareware.

Alex.
--
Grobbl. Noggl ARGH! ARGH! Gabbl. Nagga Frk'Tkl Kpfzt. al...@zool.unizh.ch.
Znamifktzgck. A. Schroeder, Buelachstr. 1c, CH-8057 Zuerich, Switzerland.

[Eli Zaretskii]

On 9 Mar 1996, Paul Mills wrote:

> Problem with EMACS, I think, is this lithp thtuff. Seems that EMACS sees text
> as "streams of [LITHP] objects.."(DDJ april '93). That might explain why you
> can't get a line/column counter like on any DOS editor. I have some

Emacs *can* show you line and column numbers (in the latest versions).

[Dave Love]

>>>>> On 5 Mar 1996 19:51:03 GMT, pmi...@capecod.net (Paul Mills) said:

Paul> Emacs is powerful and extensible -- and hard to use.

I don't know why people think this (certainly concerning recent
windowing versions), but Stallman takes seriously helpful suggestions
for improving its ease of use, documentation or whatever. Help out!

[Alex Schroeder]

Some time back a user suggested the package aurora2e.zip. I tried it
and have switched from QEdit to Aurora.