oz@yetti.UUCP (Ozan Yigit) (01/08/86)
Could someone spell it out for me exactly what needs to be changed in JOVE so that it could be PD ?? (You see, I have this obsession to find a PD editor that is small, fast, and expandable..) My examination of its sources indicate: [a] Reg. expr. stuff is taken directly from ed, which, obviously is not PD. This could be replaced by the SEARCH routines of gosling's emacs, which, according to a recent posting, is PD. [b] Temporary file I/O of JOVE is, according to the author's notes, taken from VI. This is obviously the case, by comparing the sources of both. Is this code fragment PD ?? If not, does someone have a PD replacement ?? Rest of the code does not remind me of anything else in UN*X sources, so I assume that it does not contain any NON-PD stuff. Does anyone know anything to the contrary ?? Why bother with jove ?? So far I could not find any OTHER editor that is reasonably small, somewhat expandable, and does not take a man-year to convert/improve/clean-up. (although some other editors may be on the horizon..) This is what I found: GNU Emacs: Too big, too 4.2 dependent, I no way will it run on anything like a PDP-11. [Let me rephrase that: anything with restricted address space and/or small amounts of memory] Goslings Emacs: We know all about that one.. Monty's Emacs: Small, and fast. But despite all my prayers, that one is not PD nor is it cheap. Even if I paid for it, how about sources ?? Probably need UN*X licences and red-tape to go thru. [I call it Monty's Emacs, as a short form of Montgomery's Emacs. No insult or cheap shot meant.] Jove: Medium sized, messy code, some non-PD code fragments, but that can be fixed. Not very expandable. It will run on a PDP-11 using memory overlays. Some UN*X dependencies, which could also be fixed by those who do not have UN*X. u-Emacs: Bare-bones emacs-like front-end, no temporary-file I/O. not expandable. We may see more of this editor. Lot cleaner code. Originally written by David Conroy. [The one who wrote the DECUS C compiler] sedt: An excellent EDT-like editor. This one is written by a DEC engineer, Anker Berg-Sonne. This editor is found on some DEC bulletin boards, and runs on Rainbow, VMS and MS/DOS systems. Powerful macro capability. People who use it swear by it. Sources are nowhere to be found. Presumably it is PD [an early version written in pascal was submitted to DECUS tape], but I cannot get a hold of the author to confirm this. [Does anyone know anything about its sources, or how to get in touch with the author ??] scame: Emacs like, non-expandable, very messy code. Probably there are lotsa bugs, and needs lotsa work. Definitely PD. tores: An emacs-like editor from MIT. It is found on an old USENIX tape. Hacked by students in Lincoln-Sudbury Highschool. [Where original JOVE was born] Dunno to much about it. Terminal handling is done thru a seperate process. May or may not be PD. ped: Portable screen editor from UofT. Written in pascal, and probably not PD. Last I heard about it, it was much like EDT. amis: Another emacs-like editor, from Europe. written in Pascal, and not PD. Oz (whizzard of something or another..) -- Usenet: [decvax|allegra|linus|ihnp4]!utzoo!yetti!oz Bitnet: oz@[yusol|yuyetti] In the beginning, there was Word all right, except it wasn't fixed number of bits.
gwyn@brl-tgr.ARPA (Doug Gwyn <gwyn>) (01/11/86)
> Monty's Emacs: Small, and fast. But despite all my > prayers, that one is not PD nor is > it cheap. Even if I paid for it, how > about sources ?? Probably need UN*X > licences and red-tape to go thru. > [I call it Monty's Emacs, as a short > form of Montgomery's Emacs. No insult > or cheap shot meant.] Montgomery's EMACS is available through the UNIX System Toolchest. If you have several computers at your installation then it is relatively cheap; there is a one-time fixed fee (plus communication charges) that covers all your CPUs, and you get complete sources. I left my Toolchest price list elsewhere, but I seem to recall that the fee was no more than $2000. (If you want to distribute it as part of a commercial product, then there is a substantially more expensive sublicensing fee.)
oz@yetti.UUCP (Ozan Yigit) (01/15/86)
In article <1495@brl-tgr.ARPA> gwyn@brl-tgr.ARPA (Doug Gwyn <gwyn>) writes: > >Montgomery's EMACS is available through the UNIX System Toolchest. >If you have several computers at your installation then it is >relatively cheap; there is a one-time fixed fee (plus communication >charges) that covers all your CPUs, and you get complete sources. I *know* that. But how is the poor nearby hacker who can barely efford xenix or venix for his/her system supposed to get it ?? My article was concerned with editors that people (ordinary people at that) can get at. As far as my private set-up is concerned, I classify as such as well. I run VENIX, no sources of course. I personally do not own any source licenses, nor am I an educational institution. Thus, strictly speaking, monty's emacs is off limits for me as well.. In terms of our CS site, I am not really concerned. Oz -- Usenet: [decvax|allegra|linus|ihnp4]!utzoo!yetti!oz Bitnet: oz@[yusol|yuyetti] In the beginning, there was Word all right, except it wasn't fixed number of bits.