Which editor do you use?
Rugxulo
editing. My favorite is TDE although I've dabbled in trying out a
billion others over the past year or two (making a personal
checklist). Since this newsgroup is such low traffic these days, I'll
just fill in the blanks (to the best of my knowledge) and you can
correct me if you feel like it. ;-)
Rugxulo: TDE, VILE somewhat, etc.
Jason Hood: TDE
Thomas D.: VILE
Eli Z.: GNU Emacs
Charles S.: ED (EDT-alike, not the standard *nix line editor)
Japheth: FTE
Shawn H: FED
Riebisch: Aurora, FED
CBFalconer: MS EDIT
Rod P.: MS EDIT, vi clone
SET: SETEDIT
John D.: JED
Bram M.: VIM
Russ N.: XEmacs, Freemacs
Linus T.: MicroEmacs
Gautier deM.: AdaGIDE, his EDIT
(others): RHIDE, VIM
Corrections welcome!
You may (hopefully!) also find these links interesting:
http://www.texteditors.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.editors/topics
http://board.flatassembler.net/topic.php?t=6267&start=20
Ste...@aol.com
Rod Pemberton
news:f1018f14-b049-48d5...@z9g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
>
> http://board.flatassembler.net/topic.php?t=6267&start=20
>
FYI, it's a good start. Do you plan to update that post?
The post doesn't list if source is available, if any source is in assembly
or C, if the source is copyrighted and licensed or Public Domain, what type
of license is used for copyrighted code. It seems a few don't supply
sources. All but a few seem to be GPL. TDE and Stevie are apparently
Public Domain. VIM and deadlin seem to be "as is", AFAICT... The links to
"Raved", "Elvis", "FreeMacs", "FreeDOS edit" are now bad. It also doesn't
list the GPL'd SMEDIT by Prashant TR in the DJGPP contrib.
Rod Pemberton
Rugxulo
On Apr 2, 5:08 pm, "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_h...@nohavenot.cmm> wrote:
> "Rugxulo" <rugx...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:f1018f14-b049-48d5...@z9g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
>
>> http://board.flatassembler.net/topic.php?t=6267&start=20
>
> FYI, it's a good start. Do you plan to update that post?
I've thought about it, but things like that get rapidly outdated.
Besides, Tomasz has considered preventing edits after a certain amount
of time (to prevent reverse spamming ... or whatever you call it).
> The post doesn't list if source is available, if any source is in assembly
> or C, if the source is copyrighted and licensed or Public Domain, what type
> of license is used for copyrighted code.
Almost everything has sources (if link is in bold). Other than that, I
didn't look too closely.
> It seems a few don't supply
> sources. All but a few seem to be GPL. TDE and Stevie are apparently
> Public Domain. VIM and deadlin seem to be "as is", AFAICT...
VIM is GPL friendly, officially "free software" (ever since a few
years ago). The real shame is that 7.2 dropped support for the 16-bit
compile.
> The links to
> "Raved", "Elvis", "FreeMacs", "FreeDOS edit" are now bad. It also doesn't
> list the GPL'd SMEDIT by Prashant TR in the DJGPP contrib.
I can't remember if Raved moved to a new site and/or just moved yet
removed (!) any links to the editor (but I still have a local copy).
Elvis is a 16-bit compile (conventional memory only) but runs out VERY
quickly due to the .EXE itself taking about 400k. Freemacs has moved
several times, but that and FD edit are available through links on
FreeDOS' Software list (64k limit, ftw!!):
http://www.freedos.org/cgi-bin/lsm.cgi?mode=lsm&lsm=edit/emacs.lsm
http://www.freedos.org/cgi-bin/lsm.cgi?mode=lsm&lsm=base/edit.lsm
I've never tried SMEDIT.
CBFalconer
>
> Okay, so I'm curious as to what the regulars here use for text
> editing. My favorite is TDE although I've dabbled in trying out
> a billion others over the past year or two (making a personal
> checklist). Since this newsgroup is such low traffic these days,
> I'll just fill in the blanks (to the best of my knowledge) and
> you can correct me if you feel like it. ;-)
>
> Rugxulo: TDE, VILE somewhat, etc.
> Jason Hood: TDE
> Thomas D.: VILE
> Eli Z.: GNU Emacs
> Charles S.: ED (EDT-alike, not the standard *nix line editor)
> Japheth: FTE
> Shawn H: FED
> Riebisch: Aurora, FED
> Rod P.: MS EDIT, vi clone
> SET: SETEDIT
> John D.: JED
> Bram M.: VIM
> Russ N.: XEmacs, Freemacs
> Linus T.: MicroEmacs
> Gautier deM.: AdaGIDE, his EDIT
> (others): RHIDE, VIM
>
> Corrections welcome!
I don't know where you got MS EDIT. I use TextPad (not NotePad).
Occasionally Vedit.
--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
Try the download section.
DJ Delorie
> I don't know where you got MS EDIT. I use TextPad (not NotePad).
> Occasionally Vedit.
Hey, at least you're on the list.
mike7g
lol
Hey, i been lurking around here for a small while now-i got no reason
to be on there atall: just yet-but i was expecting your name to be
there too. lol
Charles Sandmann
to discuss it rationally, but don't ever try to do a comparison,
or much less criticize or try to convert the unwashed masses.
But I will assert that any worth using can be built with DJGPP :-)
Robert Riebisch
> Riebisch: Aurora, FED
"Robert R." would be more nice. ;-)
I use VC's builtin editor, Aurora, or MS EDIT in DOS and Notepad2 on
Windows. FED and JED are on my home page, but I don't use them anymore,
because I do most of coding in Windows.
--
Robert Riebisch
Bitte NUR in der Newsgroup antworten!
Please reply to the Newsgroup ONLY!
Rugxulo
On Apr 3, 7:30 am, Robert Riebisch <Robert.Riebi...@arcor.de> wrote:
> Rugxulo wrote:
> > Riebisch: Aurora, FED
>
> "Robert R." would be more nice. ;-)
Sorry, I just figured it was less ambiguous that way. :-)
> I use VC's builtin editor, Aurora, or MS EDIT in DOS and Notepad2 on
> Windows. FED and JED are on my home page, but I don't use them anymore,
> because I do most of coding in Windows.
I don't see the appeal of MS EDIT, esp. since it always expands tabs
(IIRC). I'm not saying it's bad, just there are better editors out
there.
I use TDE(W) in Windows and TDE(P) in DOS. TDE(R) exists for 16-bit,
but it runs out of memory pretty quickly. And it compiles for GNU/
Linux if you have Ncurses. If you don't mind lack of folds, tags,
undo, UTF-8, or much mouse support, it's damn good (IMHO).
If anybody is really interested, I could post (or perhaps link to) my
DOS text editor feature comparison list. (It's fairly informative but
could always be improved.)
P.S. He's not a DJGPP user (although he still uses DOS on his 8088),
but Jim Leonard likes Aurora and some vi clone (I think the one that
came with Manx or Aztec C). I think I tried telling him about
Freemacs, but he wasn't interested (anti-Emacs, ah you know the
type). ;-)
Rugxulo
I didn't forget you, but I don't recall ever seeing you mention what
editor you use. I would blindly guess something Linux-friendly, Kate
or VIM probably. But who knows, feel free to tell us. :-))
Rugxulo
On Apr 3, 7:47 am, Rugxulo <rugx...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> P.S. He's not a DJGPP user (although he still uses DOS on his 8088),
> but Jim Leonard likes Aurora and some vi clone (I think the one that
> came with Manx or Aztec C). I think I tried telling him about
> Freemacs, but he wasn't interested (anti-Emacs, ah you know the
> type). ;-)
I forgot that he did a comparison (for 4.77 Mhz 8088) that you can
read online, quite interesting:
Robert Riebisch
> I don't see the appeal of MS EDIT, esp. since it always expands tabs
> (IIRC). I'm not saying it's bad, just there are better editors out
> there.
There's no appeal. It's just pre-installed and handy for editing
configuration files.
DJ Delorie
> I didn't forget you, but I don't recall ever seeing you mention what
> editor you use. I would blindly guess something Linux-friendly, Kate
> or VIM probably. But who knows, feel free to tell us. :-))
emacs and vi.
used to use freemacs and microemacs before that.
Rugxulo
>
> > I didn't forget you, but I don't recall ever seeing you mention what
> > editor you use. I would blindly guess something Linux-friendly, Kate
> > or VIM probably. But who knows, feel free to tell us. :-))
>
> emacs and vi.
XEmacs? GNU Emacs? (and there are others, mostly "ersatz", IIRC)
VIM? XVI? NVI? Elvis? VILE?
> used to use freemacs and microemacs before that.
D. Conroy's MicroEmacs? D. Lawrence's? JASSPA?
P.S. Forgot to mention another good DJGPP-built editor: Thomas
Wolff's Mined (probably one of the best Unicode editors, esp. for DOS)
DJ Delorie
> XEmacs? GNU Emacs? (and there are others, mostly "ersatz", IIRC)
GNU emacs.
> VIM? XVI? NVI? Elvis? VILE?
vim, at the moment. I don't take advantage of the extra features so
it doesn't matter which vi it is.
> > used to use freemacs and microemacs before that.
>
> D. Conroy's MicroEmacs? D. Lawrence's? JASSPA?
Back then, there was only one :-)
Rugxulo
On Apr 3, 1:51 pm, DJ Delorie <d...@delorie.com> wrote:
>
> > VIM? XVI? NVI? Elvis? VILE?
>
> vim, at the moment. I don't take advantage of the extra features so
> it doesn't matter which vi it is.
So you never use multiple undo or folding or spell checking or
omnicomplete or GCC error catching or syntax highlighting or multiple
windows or filename completion and only edit 7-bit text?
Doubtful. ;-)
DJ Delorie
> So you never use multiple undo or folding or spell checking or
> omnicomplete or GCC error catching or syntax highlighting or
> multiple windows or filename completion and only edit 7-bit text?
Well, syntax highlighting just happens, I don't "use" it. Otherwise,
no, I don't use any of that stuff - that's what emacs is for.
Rugxulo
You must use ":!ls" and ":e#" a lot then.
> that's what emacs is for.
Then why not just use Viper mode within Emacs? There must be a
reason! :-)
DJ Delorie
> You must use ":!ls" and ":e#" a lot then.
Um, not at all.
> Then why not just use Viper mode within Emacs? There must be a
> reason! :-)
I use vi when my xterm is already in the right directory and I need to
do a quick edit or view on a file there.
Rugxulo
On Apr 3, 3:40 pm, DJ Delorie <d...@delorie.com> wrote:
> > You must use ":!ls" and ":e#" a lot then.
>
> Um, not at all.
>
Really? I always forget where the file I want to edit resides. And
":e#" is the same as Ctrl-6 usually.
> > Then why not just use Viper mode within Emacs? There must be a
> > reason! :-)
>
> I use vi when my xterm is already in the right directory and I need to
> do a quick edit or view on a file there.
This is why some people live inside Emacs with Eshell (or use
emacsclient). :-)
Eli Zaretskii
> Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2009 14:27:51 -0700 (PDT)
>
> > > Then why not just use Viper mode within Emacs? There must be a
> > > reason! :-)
> >
> > I use vi when my xterm is already in the right directory and I need to
> > do a quick edit or view on a file there.
>
> This is why some people live inside Emacs with Eshell (or use
> emacsclient). :-)
Unfortunately, emacsclient doesn't work with the DJGPP build of Emacs,
even if you run on Windows, where it could make sense. Any volunteers
to make it work?
Eshell does work in the DJGPP build of Emacs 23, even though it's been
a long time since it was hacked to do that, and I'd generally expect
the DOS support there to bitrot during that time.
Ste...@aol.com
CBFalconer
>
> Part 1.1 Type: Plain Text (text/plain)
> Encoding: 7bit
Please don't use html in newsgroups. Usenet is a pure text medium.
Rugxulo
On Apr 4, 3:12 am, Ster...@aol.com wrote:
>
> that all sounds complicated.
What does?
> I just wished there were updates to these old editors,
Which old editors? You mean Pliable (which I've never heard of) or
something else mentioned here?
> so I could use them with larger files
Aurora (now freeware) claims to support 1 GB file sizes. CWS claims
his EDT-like ED can handle 500 MB files with ease. And GNU Emacs
supports 256 MB buffers now (on 32-bit platforms, at least). I'm sure
other editors (TDE, VIM, FTE) probably work with pretty big files too.
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~knassen/aurora.html
http://clio.rice.edu/EDstuff/EDDOS157.exe
> , Umlaute, easily switch German-US-Keyboard, avoid ascii 26
> at file-end,...
Are we talking pure DOS here? Switching the keyboard is handled by
KEYB (Ctrl-Alt-F1 or -F2, IIRC), and FreeDOS has three different
variants (XKEYB, KEYB, mKEYB) although KEYB is the best (with XKEYB
being deprecated and mKEYB only for minimal support). The umlaut /
diaresis is usually dependent upon your codepage (850 found in FD's
EGA.CPX although others support it to) and probably generated by AltGr
+ whatever (I don't grok German).
http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/distributions/1.0/pkgs/keybx.zip
http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/distributions/1.0/pkgs/keybs.zip
BTW, not all editors worry about Ctrl-Z, and at least TDE has a config
option to not insert it automatically, so other editors may have
similar.
P.S. Depending upon who you want to send files to, you may prefer true
ISO-8859-1 (cp819) or UTF-8 for German instead of cp850. You'll have
to get Kosta Kostis' ISOLATIN.CPI for cp819. But at least Mined will
let you edit ISO-8859-1 or UTF-8 German text files in pure DOS even if
your terminal only supports ISO-8859-1. (Actually, Blocek is graphical
and requires a mouse, but it supports UTF-8 with its own fonts.) Of
course, GNU Emacs w/ LEIM can do all of that too (without needing
special fonts or graphics). It just depends on what you prefer.
Does any of this help?
http://www.kostis.net/freeware/isocp101.zip
http://www.towo.net/mined/
http://www.laaca-mirror.ic.cz/
Ste...@aol.com
Rugxulo
On Apr 6, 10:29 am, Ster...@aol.com wrote:
>
> thanks for the help. But it sounds a bit complicated, so I just saved it
> and postponed the tasks ... until I really need it
This is going to sound really dumb, sillier than I intend it, but here
goes anyways ...
There are a lot of German DOS users, esp. at BTTR's Forum! :-)
So if you have any questions or issues, I'm sure some of them could
help.
Rugxulo
On Apr 3, 7:47 am, Rugxulo <rugx...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> If anybody is really interested, I could post (or perhaps link to) my
> DOS text editor feature comparison list. (It's fairly informative but
> could always be improved.)
Well, hopefully Rod P. at least will find this comparison interesting:
http://rugxulo.googlepages.com/V49SPLIT.TXT (don't be fooled by the
name)
Rod Pemberton
news:26b8b849-581a-491c...@n8g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 3, 7:47 am, Rugxulo <rugx...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > If anybody is really interested, I could post (or perhaps link to) my
> > DOS text editor feature comparison list. (It's fairly informative but
> > could always be improved.)
>
> Well, hopefully Rod P. at least will find this comparison interesting:
Actually, I was thinking it might strike a chord with Jim Leonard. But, it
seems you're aware of his older editors page, and already tried to "discuss"
other editors with him... :-)
Previously,
> > I don't see the appeal of MS EDIT, esp. since it always expands tabs
> > (IIRC). I'm not saying it's bad, just there are better editors out
> > there.
Well, I for one *HATE* tabs in code. I always end up converting them to
spaces or a space, and reformatting or re-indenting. The only use I've ever
found for them is to align columns of data. But even then, I find usually
need to remove them for some reason, or other... They're just a major
nuisance.
Rod Pemberton
Ste...@aol.com
Rugxulo
On Apr 7, 11:53 am, "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_h...@nohavenot.cmm> wrote:
> "Rugxulo" <rugx...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:26b8b849-581a-491c...@n8g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 3, 7:47 am, Rugxulo <rugx...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > If anybody is really interested, I could post (or perhaps link to) my
> > > DOS text editor feature comparison list. (It's fairly informative but
> > > could always be improved.)
>
> > Well, hopefully Rod P. at least will find this comparison interesting:
>
> Actually, I was thinking it might strike a chord with Jim Leonard. But, it
> seems you're aware of his older editors page, and already tried to "discuss"
> other editors with him... :-)
I only discussed it very very briefly with him a few months back. I
think he's tired of me by now. ;-)
> Previously,
>
> > > I don't see the appeal of MS EDIT, esp. since it always expands tabs
> > > (IIRC). I'm not saying it's bad, just there are better editors out
> > > there.
>
> Well, I for one *HATE* tabs in code.
I don't think you're alone.
http://www.texteditors.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?TabsVsSpaces
http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?TabsVersusSpaces
http://www.jwz.org/doc/tabs-vs-spaces.html
http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/NoTabs
http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/TabsAreEvil
> I always end up converting them to
> spaces or a space, and reformatting or re-indenting. The only use I've ever
> found for them is to align columns of data. But even then, I find usually
> need to remove them for some reason, or other... They're just a major
> nuisance.
Recently I had the crazy idea to switch to hard tabs (via TDE.CFG). I
honestly forget why, maybe makefiles, but I eventually ran into some
subtle incompatibilities that annoyed me, so I switched back. Besides
in TDE I can toggle the Tab key to make "RealTabs" at runtime if
needed (Shift-Alt-T).
But I mostly never use real tabs anyways (although most make utils
won't work without 'em, which I find silly). But it's still odd for an
editor to always expand 'em. Anyways, at least MS EDIT finally
supported multiple file windows in Win95, but they haven't updated it
since. And one FreeDOS guy liked the interface so much that he
recently decided to clone it:
http://mateusz.viste.free.fr/dos/en/download.php?plik=msedit
P.S. Looking through CWS' ED sources today, I noticed lines with a LOT
of tabs. I'm talking about eight, nine, 10 tabs at the beginning of a
single line! Whew! ;-)
Charles Sandmann
Smaller code size, automatic formatting. I'll have your tabs. I love em.
I'm having tab tab tab tab tab tab ... (flash back to Monty Python's Spam
sketch)
>P.S. Looking through CWS' ED sources today, I noticed lines with a LOT
>of tabs. I'm talking about eight, nine, 10 tabs at the beginning of a
>single line! Whew! ;-)
Automatic indentation of program structures + complex code. With tab stops
@ 3 char increments, that's only 30 characters indent...
But with the right editor, you can convert from tabs to spaces with a
keystroke,
so who cares?
Rugxulo
On Apr 8, 11:34 pm, "Charles Sandmann" <cwsd...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> > Well, I for one *HATE* tabs in code.
>
> Smaller code size, automatic formatting. I'll have your tabs. I love em.
> I'm having tab tab tab tab tab tab ... (flash back to Monty Python's Spam
> sketch)
An 160k file of mine can be shrunk to 130k if I convert spaces to
tabs. But actually it .ZIPs up to approximately the same size either
way, so it's less of an issue. It's not that tabs are bad, just that
nobody handles them the same way.
> >P.S. Looking through CWS' ED sources today, I noticed lines with a LOT
> >of tabs. I'm talking about eight, nine, 10 tabs at the beginning of a
> >single line! Whew! ;-)
>
> Automatic indentation of program structures + complex code. With tab stops
> @ 3 char increments, that's only 30 characters indent...
FYI, GNU sets their tab stop to 2 char increments. So it's hard to
agree on what to use. I think this is where (GNU) indent comes in.
> But with the right editor, you can convert from tabs to spaces with a
> keystroke, so who cares?
M-x tabify or M-x untabify. Yes, it's fairly straightforward. In fact,
I think GNU Emacs will even assume any space in a regex includes tabs
as well by default. (I'm on XP right now, gonna build the latest
pretest via DJGPP.)
Eli Zaretskii
> Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2009 05:47:34 -0700 (PDT)
>
> FYI, GNU sets their tab stop to 2 char increments.
That's inaccurate. The GNU style _indentation_ uses 2 columns for
each indentation level, but the tab stops are still 8 columns each,
unaltered from the default. This means that you need several
indentation levels to see Emacs insert a TAB character instead of
spaces.
CBFalconer
>
>> Well, I for one *HATE* tabs in code.
>
> Smaller code size, automatic formatting. I'll have your tabs.
> I love em. I'm having tab tab tab tab tab tab ... (flash back
> to Monty Python's Spam sketch)
If you compress your text files, you will find that the ones using
spaces only are smaller than those using spaces and tabs.
Please don't delete attributions for material you quote.
Charles Sandmann
>An 160k file of mine can be shrunk to 130k if I convert spaces to
>tabs. But actually it .ZIPs up to approximately the same size either
>way, so it's less of an issue.
1) Files with tabs compile directly (30K always saved, can't say the same
about compressed files)
2) That 30K reading and writing from disk on editors adds up over the years
3) The compile speed is marginally faster since there are fewer chars to
process
4) I'll haunt you *FOREVER* if you say disk space is cheap and it doesn't
matter ;-)
>> Automatic indentation of program structures + complex code. With tab
>> stops
>> @ 3 char increments, that's only 30 characters indent...
>It's not that tabs are bad, just that nobody handles them the same way.
>FYI, GNU sets their tab stop to 2 char increments.
Code still looks OK with tab stops a 2 chars, or 3 chars, or 4 chars ....
With a "default" 8 chars you need a wide screen to see it. But all real
programmers have at editor windows least 132 chars wide ... :-)
YMMV, but I'll stick to tabs. Upgrade your tab stops or editor if it
bugs you.
CBFalconer
>> to tabs. But actually it .ZIPs up to approximately the same
>> size either way, so it's less of an issue.
>
> 1) Files with tabs compile directly (30K always saved, can't say
> the same about compressed files)
> 2) That 30K reading and writing from disk on editors adds up over
> the years
> 3) The compile speed is marginally faster since there are fewer
> chars to process
> 4) I'll haunt you *FOREVER* if you say disk space is cheap and it
> doesn't matter ;-)
Disk space is cheap, but it does matter. You are allowed to
decompress the source files before compiling them. The complete
source package, with make files etc., can be kept in a .zip file.
The source file with spaces will take up less room than the source
file with tabs IN THAT .zip FILE.
Charles Sandmann
"CBFalconer" <cbfal...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:49DECABB...@yahoo.com...
> Disk space is cheap, but it does matter. You are allowed to
> decompress the source files before compiling them. The complete
> source package, with make files etc., can be kept in a .zip file.
> The source file with spaces will take up less room than the source
> file with tabs IN THAT .zip FILE.
If you build applications that other people write, sure. If you
program and build your own applications, having tabs in the
source is both a disk space saver (the source is always
decompressed) and a time saver when building.
Edit, build, test. Repeat 1000 times.
Try compiling from old MFM disks (or god forbid floppies)
sometime and you can really see the difference.
Rod Pemberton
news:QZadnYMxDO0TT0PU...@earthlink.com...
>
> Try compiling from old MFM disks ...
> sometime and you can really see the difference.
I can't. All my MFM drives died well over a decade ago. In fact, all of
the MFM's I had seemed to die after a just a few years of use... If I
wanted to go through the work of unpacking my old computer stuff (not
happening...), I _could_ try a really old IDE - which was working when
packed away. Technically, I guess it was pre-IDE drive, since it came with
it's own interface card which was supposedly IDE.
Allow I'm certain MFM's blew like light bulb's, this guy has a page saying
they were quite reliable:
http://www.redhill.net.au/d/d-a.html
Ha! I recognize the ST-225 and ST-251. But, I'm not sure if I owned them.
The MFM drives I remember looked at little bit like the TM262 or HH-1050
pictures, odd light "orange" color cast metal, and a big exposed stepper
motor like floppy...
> Try compiling from ... god forbid floppies
> sometime and you can really see the difference.
You mean 5 1/4 inch floppies (or "god forbid," 8 inch floppies...), not
"large capacity," and "modern," 3 1/2 inch floppies, right? Personally, I
wouldn't even attempt compiling on 5 1/4's with anything other than Turbo
C/C++, or perhaps another compiler of the era.
Rod Pemberton
Ste...@aol.com
Charles Sandmann
news:grmqc2$g1o$1...@aioe.org...
> "Charles Sandmann" <cws...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:QZadnYMxDO0TT0PU...@earthlink.com...
>> sometime and you can really see the difference.
>
> You mean 5 1/4 inch floppies (or "god forbid," 8 inch floppies...), not
> "large capacity," and "modern," 3 1/2 inch floppies, right? Personally, I
> wouldn't even attempt compiling on 5 1/4's with anything other than Turbo
> C/C++, or perhaps another compiler of the era.
All my PDP/11 work was on the 8" floppies (dual floppy system).
The pattern of certain compiles was so orderly it started to sound
like music to you after hundreds of times... That was a luxury
compared to compiling off DEC TU-58 cartridges, which used
a 38K serial line connection for connection. On those things a
compile might take 2 hours. (Yes, source was full of tabs!
And short variable names ! And no documentation !)
I had a DJGPP mini-distro that would fit on a 1.44MB 3.5" floppy, and
you could keep your source on the 360K 5.25" floppy for compiles.
Rugxulo
http://www.delorie.com/gnu/docs/textutils/expand.1.html
http://www.delorie.com/gnu/docs/textutils/unexpand.1.html
Although you can use any similar utility (tr, sed) if you really
wanted.
Rugxulo
On Apr 10, 12:07 pm, "Charles Sandmann" <cwsd...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> > "Charles Sandmann" <cwsd...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> All my PDP/11 work was on the 8" floppies (dual floppy system).
> The pattern of certain compiles was so orderly it started to sound
> like music to you after hundreds of times... That was a luxury
> compared to compiling off DEC TU-58 cartridges, which used
> a 38K serial line connection for connection. On those things a
> compile might take 2 hours. (Yes, source was full of tabs!
> And short variable names ! And no documentation !)
>
> I had a DJGPP mini-distro that would fit on a 1.44MB 3.5" floppy,
Uncompressed? (Impossible nowadays.)
> and you could keep your source on the 360K 5.25" floppy for compiles.
Thank God for RAM disks! :-)
A. Wik
> Okay, so I'm curious as to what the regulars here use for text
> editing.
I don't know if I can be regarded as a regular, but I tend
to prefer VIM (http://vim.org/) these days. Before that,
I used JOE (get it from my FTP site at ftp.narpes.com:/pub),
and before that I used the Borland Pascal IDE. On a daily
basis, I also need to use more primitive tools, like "cat >
file.c", and old nvi and sh lacking command line history.
VIM works very well under DOS, especially if you run
smartdrv, VCACHE or similar and a LFN provider such
as the Win9x IFSMGR. The DJGPP-compiled DOS-executable
always displays DOS files correctly. The GUI (win32)
version, called GVIM, is not bad either, if you use
settings like the following:
(From %HOME%/.gvimrc:)
" This will fix proper CP437 at least on Win9x:
set guifont=Courier_New:h10:cOEM
set encoding=cp437
set termencoding=latin1
set fileformats=unix,dos
colorscheme borland2
set lines=64
set formatoptions=q
The fileformats=unix,dos causes the single line feed
format of text files to be preferred. I've found that
you almost never need the CR-LF format. Only some
dumb apps like Notepad.exe and the builtin "type"
command of command.com don't understand such basics.
The DJGPP implementation of less(1) would be a
replacement for "type" and "more", except that it
tends not to display high or low CP437-characters
properly, and in fact, VIM tends to do a better job:
cat file.txt | vim -
(By the way, did you know that Unix ttys typically
require CR-LF just as much as the DOS console to avoid
the staircase effect? The secret is that the terminal
driver inserts a CR automatically, so you won't have
to, unless you change the settings. Take a look at
stty(1),. You can use it to set EOF to ^Z too, at
least on some systems; not that one would'd want to.)
-aw
PS. This was delayed by a number of days due to dead
mail2news gateways.
Glaux
still use RHIDE for DJGPP coding (and DOS Navigator for other files).
Unfortunatelly RHIDE is dead and it's doesn't work 100% well under
WinXP (e.g. when compile it switch to fullscreen or sometimes crashes
or debugger don't work with new gcc) but for me it's still the best...
Rugxulo
I think JED, GNU Emacs, FTE, TDE, VIM, etc. can all jump to GCC
compiler errors via "C-x `" (backtick) or so. JED has a Borland-ish
mode, and GNU Emacs has CUA mode. Anyways, RHIDE is internally based
upon SETEDIT, so try that if you really want.
P.S. I can't remember exactly, but I think RHIDE's GDB only works with
COFF, so you may have to compile with "-gcoff" else it prefers Dwarf.
When / if Eli finished GDB 7.0, that would make it that much easier (I
assume) for someone to update RHGDB with it, if it ever gets
resurrected. Don't hold your breath, though (but do feel free to help
him if possible).
Josep M.
Thanks
Andris Pavenis
ago) RHIDE heavily depended on deprecated features of GDB. I do not
thing that this will improve with upcoming gdb-7.0. Most likely some
of required and deprecated features could even be removed completely.
I myself have not used RHIDE already for several years and have no plans
to use it. As the result it is extremely unlikely that I'll could do any
build
of RHIDE in future.
Andris
Rugxulo
On May 7, 2:38 am, "Josep M." <josepma...@turomas.com> wrote:
>
> Has anybody kirilik fonts for GRX graphics library?
>
> Thanks
Didn't GRX just use X11 fonts (maybe converted)? It came with some,
but those were mostly Latin-1, right? Anyways, try looking for
ISO-8859-5, which is the Cyrillic stuff. At least if GRX lets you
convert from X11 fonts, then it should be feasible, no?
If all you want is decent Cyrillic support in a text editor, try
Mined: http://www.towo.net/mined
A. Wik
On Thu, 7 May 2009, Rugxulo wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On May 7, 2:38�am, "Josep M." <josepma...@turomas.com> wrote:
> >
> > Has anybody kirilik fonts for GRX graphics library?
> >
Cyrillic.
> > Thanks
>
> Didn't GRX just use X11 fonts (maybe converted)? It came with some,
> but those were mostly Latin-1, right? Anyways, try looking for
> ISO-8859-5, which is the Cyrillic stuff
No, go for KOI8-R - because it's not only the best Cyrillic character
set, but also contains many of those marvelous box drawing and graphic
characters found in the premier code page 437 - the encoding of the VGA
ROM fonts and the best character set of all time!
-aw
Rugxulo
On Apr 2, 3:27 pm, Rugxulo <rugx...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Okay, so I'm curious as to what the regulars here use for text
> editing. My favorite is TDE although I've dabbled in trying out a
> billion others over the past year or two (making a personal
> checklist). Since this newsgroup is such low traffic these days, I'll
> just fill in the blanks (to the best of my knowledge) and you can
> correct me if you feel like it. ;-)
Sorry to bump this thread just to mention a Win32-only program, but it
made me laugh:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/notepad-plus
"Notepad++, a source code editor and MS Windows Notepad replacement,
has the mission to offer a greener environment. By optimizing its
routines, it results in reducing CPU power consumption then reducing
the world carbon dioxide emissions."
;-))
Gerrit van Niekerk
Sorry to bump this thread just to mention a Win32-only program, but it
made me laugh:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/notepad-plus
"Notepad++, a source code editor and MS Windows Notepad replacement,
has the mission to offer a greener environment. By optimizing its
routines, it results in reducing CPU power consumption then reducing
the world carbon dioxide emissions."
;-))
CBFalconer
CBFalconer
>
> Part 1.1 Type: Plain Text (text/plain)
> Encoding: 7bit
Please don't use html on Usenet.
JussiJ
The Zeus IDE: http://www.zeusedit.com
It has a fully configurable editor with standard features likecode
folding,
syntax highlighting, macro scripting etc
It also has lots of IDE fetures like project/workspace management,
class
browsing, integrated version control, ftp editing etc.
Cheers Jussi
Josep M.
If(1.0>2.0) sometimos return trae. I think it is caused by an hardware
interrupt that modifies copro registers. Tos ave and restore it I use that
code:
//saving
asm("fnsave %0\n\t"
"fwait\n\t"
:"=g" (state87)
);
//Interrupt code.
//restoring
asm("frstor %0\n\t"
"fwait\n\t"
:"=g" (state87)
);
But comparison continues wrong sometimos.
Any idea