Editors, was: Re: VT keyboard replacement

[Simon Clubley]

On 2021-11-07, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) <hel...@asclothestro.multivax.de> wrote:
> In article <3dc63091-9f4e-4698...@googlegroups.com>, Slo
><slo...@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Some editors use Ctrl+T to delete the next word, great, but it's awkward
>> - I need two hands for this - compared to a dedicated keypad key.

I use the EDT keypad in emacs and find it much more quicker and easier
than typing Ctrl-<this, that and the other>. :-)

>
> Right. EDT is by far the most efficient editor. And it is much more
> than just the EDT keypad.
>

How do you get EDT to show you where the starting brace in the
current section of code you are working on is (for example) ?

How do you get EDT to convert spaces to tabs in your code ?
(tabify in emacs, never checked to see if EVE can do it).

Can you do a rectangle select in EDT ?

Can you show more than one buffer on the screen at the same time
in EDT ?

Does EDT support programming language editing modes ? (I tend not to
use them, except for some special cases, but some people use them all
the time).

Simon.

--
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.

[Lawrence D’Oliveiro]

On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 2:29:04 PM UTC+13, Simon Clubley wrote:
> Does EDT support programming language editing modes ?

Or what about multi-file editing ... has it figured that out yet, I wonder?

(I don’t use the language modes either.)

[Phillip Helbig (undress to reply)]

In article <sm9ugt$scb$2...@dont-email.me>, Simon Clubley

<clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes:

> On 2021-11-07, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) <hel...@asclothestro.multivax.de> wrote:
> > In article <3dc63091-9f4e-4698...@googlegroups.com>, Slo
> ><slo...@gmail.com> writes:
> >
> >> Some editors use Ctrl+T to delete the next word, great, but it's awkward
> >> - I need two hands for this - compared to a dedicated keypad key.
>
> I use the EDT keypad in emacs and find it much more quicker and easier
> than typing Ctrl-<this, that and the other>. :-)
>
> >
> > Right. EDT is by far the most efficient editor. And it is much more
> > than just the EDT keypad.
> >
>
> How do you get EDT to show you where the starting brace in the
> current section of code you are working on is (for example) ?
>
> How do you get EDT to convert spaces to tabs in your code ?
> (tabify in emacs, never checked to see if EVE can do it).
>
> Can you do a rectangle select in EDT ?
>
> Can you show more than one buffer on the screen at the same time
> in EDT ?
>
> Does EDT support programming language editing modes ? (I tend not to
> use them, except for some special cases, but some people use them all
> the time).

It is the most efficient, not the most powerful. :-)

[Lawrence D’Oliveiro]

On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 6:27:48 PM UTC+13, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
> It is the most efficient, not the most powerful. :-)

As in helping you to be the most productive?

[Phillip Helbig (undress to reply)]

In article <b6c4a416-0ccf-4518...@googlegroups.com>,

Exactly.

[Simon Clubley]

How exactly ?

By today's standards, EDT's limited functionality makes it the
assembly language version of editors when compared to other editors
which are fully featured editors.

EDT can't even show more than one window on the screen at the same
time. How does that make EDT the most productive editor ?

Even EVE can do that, which makes even EVE much more productive than EDT.

[Arne Vajhøj]

On 11/8/2021 1:25 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2021-11-08, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) <hel...@asclothestro.multivax.de> wrote:
>> In article <b6c4a416-0ccf-4518...@googlegroups.com>,
>> =?UTF-8?Q?Lawrence_D=E2=80=99Oliveiro?= <lawren...@gmail.com> writes:
>>> On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 6:27:48 PM UTC+13, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
>>>> It is the most efficient, not the most powerful. :-)
>>>
>>> As in helping you to be the most productive?
>>
>> Exactly.
>
> How exactly ?
>
> By today's standards, EDT's limited functionality makes it the
> assembly language version of editors when compared to other editors
> which are fully featured editors.
>
> EDT can't even show more than one window on the screen at the same
> time. How does that make EDT the most productive editor ?
>
> Even EVE can do that, which makes even EVE much more productive than EDT.

EVE is mostly a super set of EDT functionality wise and EVE supports EDT
key mapping, so I don't see EDT as being more productive.

EDT probably use less memory than EVE. I suspect that EDT can do with
like 25-50 KB and EVE may require like 100-250 KB. But since memory
is bought by the GB today, then that is hardly an issue.

(note that a modern IDE requires like 256 MB - 2 GB of memory)

Arne

[Lawrence D’Oliveiro]

On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 7:53:04 AM UTC+13, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> EVE is mostly a super set of EDT functionality wise ...

Except it was never saddled with anything so clunky as a “current direction” mode ...

> (note that a modern IDE requires like 256 MB - 2 GB of memory)

top reports that my Emacs instance is currently using around 87MB of “RES”(ident) RAM. This after continuously running for about 2½ weeks.

But then, Emacs is not an IDE. IDEs limit you to using their particular build systems, while Emacs doesn’t care what build system you want to use: whatever the command is to launch a build, you can bind it to a single custom keystroke.

[Dave Froble]

On 11/8/2021 1:25 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:

> On 2021-11-08, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) <hel...@asclothestro.multivax.de> wrote:
>> In article <b6c4a416-0ccf-4518...@googlegroups.com>,
>> =?UTF-8?Q?Lawrence_D=E2=80=99Oliveiro?= <lawren...@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 6:27:48 PM UTC+13, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
>>>> It is the most efficient, not the most powerful. :-)
>>>
>>> As in helping you to be the most productive?
>>
>> Exactly.
>>
>
> How exactly ?
>
> By today's standards, EDT's limited functionality makes it the
> assembly language version of editors when compared to other editors
> which are fully featured editors.
>
> EDT can't even show more than one window on the screen at the same
> time. How does that make EDT the most productive editor ?
>
> Even EVE can do that, which makes even EVE much more productive than EDT.
>
> Simon.
>

If it is all I need and use ....

Which part of that was not understood?

--
David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: da...@tsoft-inc.com
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA 15486

[Chris Townley]

Emacs - Eight Meg and continuously swapping

<g>


--
Chris

[Arne Vajhøj]

On 11/8/2021 3:30 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 7:53:04 AM UTC+13, Arne Vajhøj
> wrote:
>> EVE is mostly a super set of EDT functionality wise ...
>
> Except it was never saddled with anything so clunky as a “current
> direction” mode ...

????

EVE has direction.

> But then, Emacs is not an IDE. IDEs limit you to using their
> particular build systems, while Emacs doesn’t care what build system
> you want to use: whatever the command is to launch a build, you can
> bind it to a single custom keystroke.

????

Eclipse for Java supports its own build but also ant, maven and gradle.

Arne

[Lawrence D’Oliveiro]

On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 1:31:19 PM UTC+13, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 11/8/2021 3:30 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 7:53:04 AM UTC+13, Arne Vajhøj
>> wrote:
>>
>>> EVE is mostly a super set of EDT functionality wise ...
>>
>> Except it was never saddled with anything so clunky as a “current
>> direction” mode ...
>>
> ????
>
> EVE has direction.

When I used it, it did not. It had separate commands for movement in forward versus backward directions. Just like any other editor -- except EDT.

>> But then, Emacs is not an IDE. IDEs limit you to using their
>> particular build systems, while Emacs doesn’t care what build system
>> you want to use: whatever the command is to launch a build, you can
>> bind it to a single custom keystroke.
>>
> ????
>
> Eclipse for Java supports its own build but also ant, maven and gradle.

So you have a choice of a Java-based build system, a build system based on Java, or even a Java-building system for building Java programs!

What was that joke from “The Blues Brothers”, about offering both kinds of music, Country and Western?

[Lawrence D’Oliveiro]

On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 12:36:35 PM UTC+13, Chris Townley wrote:
> Emacs - Eight Meg and continuously swapping
>
> <g>

Let me guess .. early 1990s?

Trying to figure out when that would still have had enough edge to be funny, before it started to get to the point where Roy from “The IT Crowd” would be asking “Are you from the past?” ...

[Arne Vajhøj]

On 11/8/2021 8:20 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 1:31:19 PM UTC+13, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 11/8/2021 3:30 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 7:53:04 AM UTC+13, Arne Vajhøj
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> EVE is mostly a super set of EDT functionality wise ...
>>>
>>> Except it was never saddled with anything so clunky as a “current
>>> direction” mode ...
>>>
>> ????
>>
>> EVE has direction.
>
> When I used it, it did not. It had separate commands for movement in forward versus backward directions. Just like any other editor -- except EDT.

It did not have a status line with 3 items at the right where the
last one was direction?

>>> But then, Emacs is not an IDE. IDEs limit you to using their
>>> particular build systems, while Emacs doesn’t care what build system
>>> you want to use: whatever the command is to launch a build, you can
>>> bind it to a single custom keystroke.
>>>
>> ????
>>
>> Eclipse for Java supports its own build but also ant, maven and gradle.
>
> So you have a choice of a Java-based build system, a build system based on Java, or even a Java-building system for building Java programs!

If you use a Java IDE then it makes sense to support all the commonly
used build systems for Java, but not support build systems used in
other languages.

If you use Eclipse C++ it supports builtin and makefile.

If you use Eclipse Rust it supports Cargo.

If you use Eclipse Scala it supports builtin and sbt.

Arne

[Chris Townley]

Late 80s

--
Chris

[Phillip Helbig (undress to reply)]

In article <smbq3b$o9$1...@dont-email.me>, Simon Clubley

<clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes:

> >> > It is the most efficient, not the most powerful. :-)
> >>
> >> As in helping you to be the most productive?
> >
> > Exactly.
> >
>
> How exactly ?
>
> By today's standards, EDT's limited functionality makes it the
> assembly language version of editors when compared to other editors
> which are fully featured editors.
>
> EDT can't even show more than one window on the screen at the same
> time. How does that make EDT the most productive editor ?
>
> Even EVE can do that, which makes even EVE much more productive than EDT.

Even on really fast hardware, I am always annoyed with how slow the
cursor movement is with EVE. And then it reads in the whole huge file
even if I just want to edit the first few lines.

[David Jones]

On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 12:43:01 AM UTC-5, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
> Even on really fast hardware, I am always annoyed with how slow the
> cursor movement is with EVE. And then it reads in the whole huge file
> even if I just want to edit the first few lines.

When EVE first came out, the file load at startup was a big issue when memory was scarce.
Not some much a problem anymore, and searching for a string near the end of the file is
noticeably with TPU and EDT.

[Arne Vajhøj]

Yes.

But when it was loaded it was fast to go to the bottom unlike EDT
where it could take forever to.

Arne

[VAXman-]

In article <smbq3b$o9$1...@dont-email.me>, Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes:
>On 2021-11-08, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) <hel...@asclothestro.multivax.de> wrote:
>> In article <b6c4a416-0ccf-4518...@googlegroups.com>,
>>=?UTF-8?Q?Lawrence_D=E2=80=99Oliveiro?= <lawren...@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 6:27:48 PM UTC+13, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
>>> > It is the most efficient, not the most powerful. :-)
>>>
>>> As in helping you to be the most productive?
>>
>> Exactly.
>>
>
>How exactly ?
>
>By today's standards, EDT's limited functionality makes it the
>assembly language version of editors when compared to other editors
>which are fully featured editors.

Where is the list of *today's standards* for editors?

--
VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG

I speak to machines with the voice of humanity.

[Arne Vajhøj]

On 11/9/2021 9:57 AM, VAX...@SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
> In article <smbq3b$o9$1...@dont-email.me>, Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes:
>> On 2021-11-08, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) <hel...@asclothestro.multivax.de> wrote:
>>> In article <b6c4a416-0ccf-4518...@googlegroups.com>,
>>> =?UTF-8?Q?Lawrence_D=E2=80=99Oliveiro?= <lawren...@gmail.com> writes:
>>>> On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 6:27:48 PM UTC+13, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
>>>>> It is the most efficient, not the most powerful. :-)
>>>>
>>>> As in helping you to be the most productive?
>>>
>>> Exactly.
>>
>> How exactly ?
>>
>> By today's standards, EDT's limited functionality makes it the
>> assembly language version of editors when compared to other editors
>> which are fully featured editors.
>
> Where is the list of *today's standards* for editors?

"today's standard" does not imply a formal (ANSI/ISO) standard just
some relative vague general expectations.

What is the general expectations from an editor today?

I would say:
- GUI
- standard menus with at least File, Edit and Help in the menu bar
- at least Open, Save, Save As and Exit in the File menu
- at least Copy, Cut, Paste, Search and Replace in the Edit menu
- common shortcuts CTRL/A, CTRL/C, CTRL/X and CTRL/V
- ability to mark blocks with mouse
- certain edit function available via right click
- ability to have multiple files open
- ability to show multiple buffers simultaneously
- some language specific color highlighting
- some smart indenting

If any of that is missing then I think eyebrows will be raised.

Several of these are just conventions. But it is conventions that
ensures that you can open an editor that you have never used
before and do some basic editing because the basic stuff is the
same.

Arne

[Bill Gunshannon]

On 11/9/21 10:21 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 11/9/2021 9:57 AM, VAX...@SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
>> In article <smbq3b$o9$1...@dont-email.me>, Simon Clubley
>> <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes:
>>> On 2021-11-08, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply)
>>> <hel...@asclothestro.multivax.de> wrote:
>>>> In article <b6c4a416-0ccf-4518...@googlegroups.com>,
>>>> =?UTF-8?Q?Lawrence_D=E2=80=99Oliveiro?= <lawren...@gmail.com>
>>>> writes:
>>>>> On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 6:27:48 PM UTC+13, Phillip Helbig
>>>>> (undress to reply) wrote:
>>>>>> It is the most efficient, not the most powerful. :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> As in helping you to be the most productive?
>>>>
>>>> Exactly.
>>>
>>> How exactly ?
>>>
>>> By today's standards, EDT's limited functionality makes it the
>>> assembly language version of editors when compared to other editors
>>> which are fully featured editors.
>>
>> Where is the list of *today's standards* for editors?
>
> "today's standard" does not imply a formal (ANSI/ISO) standard just
> some relative vague general expectations.

It's called "de facto" and it has been around a lot longer than
"today".


bill

[Slo]

> I would say:
> - GUI
> - standard menus with at least File, Edit and Help in the menu bar
> - at least Open, Save, Save As and Exit in the File menu
> - at least Copy, Cut, Paste, Search and Replace in the Edit menu
> - common shortcuts CTRL/A, CTRL/C, CTRL/X and CTRL/V
> - ability to mark blocks with mouse
> - certain edit function available via right click
> - ability to have multiple files open
> - ability to show multiple buffers simultaneously
> - some language specific color highlighting
> - some smart indenting

For me, the most important is missing from this list:
1. Infinite UNDO!!!
2. Automation via macro creation and execution (1 or N times, of course)
3. ...

[Dave Froble]

On 11/9/2021 9:57 AM, VAX...@SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:

> In article <smbq3b$o9$1...@dont-email.me>, Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes:
>> On 2021-11-08, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) <hel...@asclothestro.multivax.de> wrote:
>>> In article <b6c4a416-0ccf-4518...@googlegroups.com>,
>>> =?UTF-8?Q?Lawrence_D=E2=80=99Oliveiro?= <lawren...@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 6:27:48 PM UTC+13, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
>>>>> It is the most efficient, not the most powerful. :-)
>>>>
>>>> As in helping you to be the most productive?
>>>
>>> Exactly.
>>>
>>
>> How exactly ?
>>
>> By today's standards, EDT's limited functionality makes it the
>> assembly language version of editors when compared to other editors
>> which are fully featured editors.
>
> Where is the list of *today's standards* for editors?
>

Now Brian, you know that a standard is what Simon says it is ...

[Dave Froble]

In other words, WEENDOZE ...

Perhaps my usage is too focused. When I think of text editor, I think of
working on programs. Basic, Macro-32, and (hawk, spit, gag) C. Maybe some DCL.

I'm sure there can be other uses and my focus is too narrow. But for what I
use EDT on VMS, it is what I listed above. Others may have different needs.

> If any of that is missing then I think eyebrows will be raised.

Not here. My eyebrows are raised because we're talking about this.

> Several of these are just conventions. But it is conventions that
> ensures that you can open an editor that you have never used
> before and do some basic editing because the basic stuff is the
> same.

Good way to make mistakes ...

[Dave Froble]

Is your "de facto" the same as my "de facto"? I bet not.

[Simon Clubley]

On 2021-11-08, Dave Froble <da...@tsoft-inc.com> wrote:
> On 11/8/2021 1:25 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>> On 2021-11-08, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) <hel...@asclothestro.multivax.de> wrote:
>>> In article <b6c4a416-0ccf-4518...@googlegroups.com>,
>>> =?UTF-8?Q?Lawrence_D=E2=80=99Oliveiro?= <lawren...@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 6:27:48 PM UTC+13, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
>>>>> It is the most efficient, not the most powerful. :-)
>>>>
>>>> As in helping you to be the most productive?
>>>
>>> Exactly.
>>>
>>
>> How exactly ?
>>
>> By today's standards, EDT's limited functionality makes it the
>> assembly language version of editors when compared to other editors
>> which are fully featured editors.
>>
>> EDT can't even show more than one window on the screen at the same
>> time. How does that make EDT the most productive editor ?
>>
>> Even EVE can do that, which makes even EVE much more productive than EDT.
>>
>> Simon.
>>
>
> If it is all I need and use ....
>
> Which part of that was not understood?
>

The bit you missed above where Phillip claims EDT is the most productive
editor, even in the face of all the much more powerful alternatives. :-)

[Simon Clubley]

On 2021-11-09, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) <hel...@asclothestro.multivax.de> wrote:
>
> Even on really fast hardware, I am always annoyed with how slow the
> cursor movement is with EVE. And then it reads in the whole huge file
> even if I just want to edit the first few lines.
>

I don't notice any slow cursor movement with EVE.

With large files, you are talking about something that might have been
a problem in the era of MicroVax II machines but it simply isn't a
problem these days. EVE is also one hell of a lot more efficient at
handling large files overall anyway because it doesn't need an EDT-style
workfile.

[Bill Gunshannon]

Probably not, but we don't get to set it anyway, the industryh
does. :-)

Personally, my favorite editor depends entirely on what system
I am working on. On RSTS it's EDT. On Unix it's vi. And, on
any system that supports it, MicroEMACS. VMS I would have to say
LSE.

bill

[Arne Vajhøj]

On 11/9/2021 1:37 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
> On 11/9/2021 10:21 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> What is the general expectations from an editor today?
>>
>> I would say:
>> - GUI
>> - standard menus with at least File, Edit and Help in the menu bar
>> - at least Open, Save, Save As and Exit in the File menu
>> - at least Copy, Cut, Paste, Search and Replace in the Edit menu
>> - common shortcuts CTRL/A, CTRL/C, CTRL/X and CTRL/V
>> - ability to mark blocks with mouse
>> - certain edit function available via right click
>> - ability to have multiple files open
>> - ability to show multiple buffers simultaneously
>> - some language specific color highlighting
>> - some smart indenting
>
> In other words, WEENDOZE ...

There are a lot of editors available on Windows that provide that.

But it is not specific for Windows. Linux editors will be the same.
I suspect that macOS editors will be the same. Heck even VMS GUI editors
will behave somewhat like this.

> Perhaps my usage is too focused.  When I think of text editor, I think of
> working on programs.  Basic, Macro-32, and (hawk, spit, gag) C.  Maybe
> some DCL.
>
> I'm sure there can be other uses and my focus is too narrow.  But for
> what I
> use EDT on VMS, it is what I listed above.  Others may have different
> needs.

The above is what most will use for light code editing.

For heavy code editing most will switch to a full blown IDE and
add features like:
- integration with source control
- integration with build system
- integration with debugger
- integration with help for programming language and RTL
- refactoring support
- suggestions as you write

But unless one work for a company with strict tool policies then one can
always pick the tool that one prefer.

If you like EDT then you just use EDT.

Arne

[Arne Vajhøj]

On 11/9/2021 2:08 PM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
> On 11/9/21 1:38 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
>> On 11/9/2021 10:57 AM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>>> On 11/9/21 10:21 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>> On 11/9/2021 9:57 AM, VAX...@SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
>>>>> In article <smbq3b$o9$1...@dont-email.me>, Simon Clubley

>>>>>> By today's standards, EDT's limited functionality makes it the
>>>>>> assembly language version of editors when compared to other editors
>>>>>> which are fully featured editors.
>>>>>
>>>>> Where is the list of *today's standards* for editors?
>>>>
>>>> "today's standard" does not imply a formal (ANSI/ISO) standard just
>>>> some relative vague general expectations.
>>>
>>> It's called "de facto" and it has been around a lot longer than
>>> "today".
>>
>> Is your "de facto" the same as my "de facto"?  I bet not.
>>
>
> Probably not, but we don't get to set it anyway, the industryh
> does.  :-)
>
> Personally, my favorite editor depends entirely on what system
> I am working on.  On RSTS it's EDT.  On Unix it's vi.  And, on
> any system that supports it, MicroEMACS. VMS I would have to say
> LSE.

It is worth nothing that it is increasingly common that code
get actual written on a different platform than destination
platform.

Arne

[Simon Clubley]

On 2021-11-09, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG <VAX...@SendSpamHere.ORG> wrote:
> In article <smbq3b$o9$1...@dont-email.me>, Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes:
>>On 2021-11-08, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) <hel...@asclothestro.multivax.de> wrote:
>>> In article <b6c4a416-0ccf-4518...@googlegroups.com>,
>>>=?UTF-8?Q?Lawrence_D=E2=80=99Oliveiro?= <lawren...@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 6:27:48 PM UTC+13, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
>>>> > It is the most efficient, not the most powerful. :-)
>>>>
>>>> As in helping you to be the most productive?
>>>
>>> Exactly.
>>>
>>
>>How exactly ?
>>
>>By today's standards, EDT's limited functionality makes it the
>>assembly language version of editors when compared to other editors
>>which are fully featured editors.
>
> Where is the list of *today's standards* for editors?
>

Some examples are:

Multiple buffers showing in multiple windows on the screen.

A programming language for the editor so you can write extensions
and add additional functionality in general.

Brace and bracket matching.

Lots of editing utility and other built-in functions.

Language modes for those who use them (I don't, except in special cases).

[Bill Gunshannon]

I've done that for decades. Especially with machines with really
poor editors. Like OS9 and TRSDOS. :-)

bill

[hb]

On 11/9/21 8:08 PM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
> Personally, my favorite editor depends entirely on what system
> I am working on.  On RSTS it's EDT.  On Unix it's vi.  And, on
> any system that supports it, MicroEMACS. VMS I would have to say
> LSE.

Which version of MicroEMACS? It is available for VMS. It was the first
editor running on VMS/Alpha and x86.

[Bill Gunshannon]

On 11/9/21 3:00 PM, hb wrote:
> On 11/9/21 8:08 PM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>> Personally, my favorite editor depends entirely on what system
>> I am working on.  On RSTS it's EDT.  On Unix it's vi.  And, on
>> any system that supports it, MicroEMACS. VMS I would have to say
>> LSE.
>
> Which version of MicroEMACS?

Different versions on different machines. Been a long time and I really
don't remember version numbers anyway.

> It is available for VMS. It was the first
> editor running on VMS/Alpha and x86.
>

I'm sure it was but VMS had suitable editors at the time I was using it.
I do find it hard to believe it was the first editor on VMS/Alpha. No
EDT?

And, anyway, real emacs has been available on VMS pretty much from the
beginning.

bill

[Robert A. Brooks]

On 11/9/2021 3:09 PM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
> On 11/9/21 3:00 PM, hb wrote:
>> On 11/9/21 8:08 PM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>>> Personally, my favorite editor depends entirely on what system
>>> I am working on.  On RSTS it's EDT.  On Unix it's vi.  And, on
>>> any system that supports it, MicroEMACS. VMS I would have to say
>>> LSE.
>>
>> Which version of MicroEMACS?
>
> Different versions on different machines. Been a long time and I really
> don't remember version numbers anyway.
>
>>                              It is available for VMS. It was the first
>> editor running on VMS/Alpha and x86.
>>
>
> I'm sure it was but VMS had suitable editors at the time I was using it.
> I do find it hard to believe it was the first editor on VMS/Alpha.  No
> EDT?

If Hartmut states it, it's almost certainly correct; he doesn't make
unsubstantiated claims.

--

-- Rob

[David Jones]

On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 3:09:55 PM UTC-5, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
> I'm sure it was but VMS had suitable editors at the time I was using it.
> I do find it hard to believe it was the first editor on VMS/Alpha. No
> EDT?

Did the RSX EDT image run under AME?