recomendation for c++ editor?
Jeffrey C. Albro
hello.... I am frustrated by the editors I have tried.
(os: UNIX)
I have tried pico, emacs, and vi.
pico's interface is great, but is too simple.
I find emacs abnoxios, and find the documentation cryptic.
vi is too counter-intuitive.
Maybe I'm just never stisfied, I don't know. Maybe I should try harder
to learn emacs.
What I'd like...
An editor that is intuitive(I know that's personal) fairly powerful,
(advanced cut/paste/find-replace), easy to learn, and has c++ additions,
such as: color coding, {} matching, and maybe == checking/ spell checking.
preferable X compatible.
Maybe I'm nuts, but that's what I'm looking for.
I would apprectiate any help I could get. Please post your answers so
other poor souls like me can get help too
;)
-jeff
Georges KO
> I find emacs abnoxios, and find the documentation cryptic.
Emacs documentation's cryptic ? Have you read the tutorial and
the Info pages ? Emacs documentation is complete and easy to access.
The first steps are always the hardest (remember, when you were 1 or
2?).
--
[et] Dieu dit : << M-x Lumiere >> ! Et la Lumiere fut.
Peter S. Lau
>I find emacs abnoxios, and find the documentation cryptic.
>
>Maybe I'm just never stisfied, I don't know. Maybe I should try harder
>to learn emacs.
Give emacs another chance. It has all the things you want.
pete
Phil Edwards
it seems Jeffrey C. Albro (jal...@allegro.cs.tufts.edu) sez:
+ (os: UNIX)
Ah, you should've placed that line in the Subject: ...
+ pico's interface is great, but is too simple.
True.
+ I find emacs abnoxios, and find the documentation cryptic.
I'm glad someone agrees with me on this one. To learn emacs, you
have to know how to navigate their damnable Info hypertext, and
to get inside the Info system, you have to be familiar with
emacs! (There is hope, however: if you have the axe editor, you
will also have the axinfo program, which is designed to read the
GNU info-type files. Axinfo is true point-and-click hypertext,
very simple and intuitive. You don't have to spend an hour
learning the help system to learn the editor, and you never have
to wrestle with that thrice-damned Info system. "We at GNU don't
use man pages because we think Info is better...." Gah.)
+ vi is too counter-intuitive.
Vi is possibly the only Unix tool which I would call actively
user-hostile. It is, however, extremely powerful and fast, which
is why I use it nearly exclusively.
+ Maybe I'm just never stisfied, I don't know. Maybe I should try harder
+ to learn emacs.
Don't give in! Hold fast!
+ What I'd like...
+ An editor that is intuitive(I know that's personal) fairly powerful,
+ (advanced cut/paste/find-replace), easy to learn, and has c++ additions,
+ such as: color coding, {} matching, and maybe == checking/ spell checking.
First suggestion:
Vi has extremely advanced search/search-replace code.
Searching is simply the / key follwed by a regexp; search-replace
is simply the old s/RE/RE/ subcommand syntax. (NOT intuitive,
granted, but very very fast once you get used to it.)
{} matching is available in most flavors of vi. Do a :set showmatch
and you should be fine.
Color-coding is rare on text editors, because the system can't
make assumptions about what kind of display capabilities you
have.
Syntax checking is almost never built into Unix text editors,
for a number of reasons: a) if you're using Unix -- an environment
designed for programmers -- you're assumed to be able to visually
check most of your work, because you have to be fairly competent
to be able to use Unix in the first place, b) one word: lint(1).
Second suggestion:
The 'joe' editor is designed to mimic the Borland-type editors
as far as keystrokes and ability. I've never used it, but many
of my friends swear by it. The man page says you can get joe via
anon ftp://world.std.com/src/editor/joe*.tar.Z.
+ preferable X compatible.
First suggestion:
You might try looking at axe, an X11 editor. Search-replace,
{} matching, etc, etc. It doesn't contain any C-specific
extensions, but it's still nice.
Second suggestion:
If you have access to any SGI machines, say, an Indy, take a
peek at jot (a proprietary GL editor). Very nice as an all-
around editor, and very very very nice when the Electric C Mode
is active!
Third suggestion:
Find xwpe, the X Windows Programming Editor. It's freeware
from some nice chap in Germany. It pops up a window that looks
exactly like the Borland IDE, and is simply an interface to the
programming tools already on your machine, e.g., when you
compile, it calls gcc; when you step-though code, it calls gdb or
dbx, etc, etc.
I don't use it myself, and I'm not sure where you can get it.
Use archie to find that one.
Luck++;
Phil
--
#include<std/disclaimer.h> The gods do not protect fools. Fools
finger pedw...@gamma.cs.wright.edu are protected by more capable fools.
email pedw...@valhalla.cs.wright.edu -Larry Niven
david guertin
: Maybe I'm just never stisfied, I don't know. Maybe I should try harder
: to learn emacs.
All editors have a certain amount of learning involved until the
commands become second nature. I haven't found emacs's any more
difficult than any others.
: An editor that is intuitive(I know that's personal) fairly powerful,
: (advanced cut/paste/find-replace), easy to learn, and has c++ additions,
: such as: color coding, {} matching, and maybe == checking/ spell checking.
: preferable X compatible.
: Maybe I'm nuts
Well, I don't know about that ;-), but your request is not unreasonable.
I would also suggest emacs, but I would suggest you try XEmacs 19.13, which
is a separate development from `regular' GNU Emacs. XEmacs has a
nicer X interface, and does color syntax highlighting (not only for
C++, but also C, TeX, and a bunch of other formats).
Cheers,
Dave
--
* David Guertin dgue...@unlinfo.unl.edu
* Dept. of Agricultural Meteorology ph: (402) 437-5178 x 20
* University of Nebraska FAX: (402) 437-5712
* Lincoln, NE 68583-0728
Peter S. Lau
>+ I find emacs abnoxios, and find the documentation cryptic.
>
>I'm glad someone agrees with me on this one. To learn emacs, you
>have to know how to navigate their damnable Info hypertext, and
>to get inside the Info system, you have to be familiar with
>emacs! (There is hope, however: if you have the axe editor, you
>will also have the axinfo program, which is designed to read the
>GNU info-type files. Axinfo is true point-and-click hypertext,
>very simple and intuitive. You don't have to spend an hour
>learning the help system to learn the editor, and you never have
>to wrestle with that thrice-damned Info system. "We at GNU don't
>use man pages because we think Info is better...." Gah.)
Well, there's always the printed manual available for reference...
available in bookstores, higher education libraries, and some
of your friends' desk. :-) That's how I started to use emacs
before I even know the there's a good help system. But then,
I had been using EVE on VMS for a few years back.
> Syntax checking is almost never built into Unix text editors,
>for a number of reasons: a) if you're using Unix -- an environment
>designed for programmers -- you're assumed to be able to visually
>check most of your work, because you have to be fairly competent
>to be able to use Unix in the first place, b) one word: lint(1).
Wow, C mode and C++ mode on emacs have saved me from careless syntax
errors "on the spot" too many times. It's not exactly syntax checking,
but it does serve that purpose well. As for lint, I have never attempted
to satisfy it to give zero output...
pete
Alex Martelli
...
>+ I find emacs abnoxios, and find the documentation cryptic.
>I'm glad someone agrees with me on this one. To learn emacs, you
>have to know how to navigate their damnable Info hypertext, and
>to get inside the Info system, you have to be familiar with
>emacs! (There is hope, however: if you have the axe editor, you
There is also a perfectly workable standalone 'info' program,
just for the browsing of info files. I'm not enthused by it,
but, it does the work it was designed to do.
>+ vi is too counter-intuitive.
>Vi is possibly the only Unix tool which I would call actively
>user-hostile. It is, however, extremely powerful and fast, which
>is why I use it nearly exclusively.
Well, it's not hostile to my hands' articulations and tendons --
its user interface, as implemented in any of its various clones,
is just about the only one that will leave my hands NOT hurting
after a long&fast&furious session of editing...
Re user-hostile, you don't know what _that_ means, IMHO, until you've
used HP/UX's xdb debugger in textmode... thanks GNU for gdb!-)
>+ What I'd like...
>+ An editor that is intuitive(I know that's personal) fairly powerful,
>+ (advanced cut/paste/find-replace), easy to learn, and has c++ additions,
>+ such as: color coding, {} matching, and maybe == checking/ spell checking.
...
>+ preferable X compatible.
If you're willing to consider a commercial solution, Sniff++ will
give you all you're looking for, and much more; we've been using it
here for a while and I find it an excellent product. It does run
on X, and it integrates well with the typical Unix programmer's tools
for version and configuration control, such as RCS, as well as other
development activities, such as compilers and debuggers (gdb in
specific). Of course, it does cost money... I think there may still
be an old freeware version around, dating back to before it went
commercial -- probably running only on Sun OS 4, and much poorer
than the present commercial version, but still OK by your criteria.
xcoral is also a freeware program that you might want to look into.
Alex
--
DISCLAIMER: these are MY personal opinions and viewpoints, NOT connected
in any way with my employer, nor any other organization or individual!
Email: mart...@cadlab.it -- Phone: +39 (51) 597 313 [Fax: 597 120]
Cad.Lab S.p.A., v. Ronzani 7/29, 40033 Casalecchio (BO), Italia