[net.micro.atari16] Editors , GNUEMACS etc

ZCSTIN05@UDCVM.BITNET (Todd Coram) (09/24/86)

So GNUEMACS is too massive for the ST... Is there a REALLY decent editor
out there for the ST that an EMACS addict can live with?
Micro-Emacs is nice and powerful, but it ain't EMACS. (Actually, the only
real EMACS is the original one written in TECO. GNUEMACS is considered an
EMACS-like editor.)

For lack of a better CLI, I need an editor that I can live in. It should
be able to do more than just compile a program or spawn a CLI, it should
be able to perform directory editing (DIRED), real macros and simple
file filtering. Yes, I know..I am power mad..I want to much, overkill, etc..
but hey, I can't live in the windowing world of GEM anymore. I spend most
of my time editing, and unless I can fire up a small editor whenever and
wherever I want in an application (without reloading the file each time).

Any interest in implementing TECO on an ST? Is this a sick idea?

maroC ddoTTodd Coram

turner@imagen.UUCP (D'arc Angel) (09/25/86)

> For lack of a better CLI, I need an editor that I can live in. It should
> be able to do more than just compile a program or spawn a CLI, it should
> be able to perform directory editing (DIRED), real macros and simple
> file filtering. Yes, I know..I am power mad..I want to much, overkill, etc..
> but hey, I can't live in the windowing world of GEM anymore. I spend most
> of my time editing, and unless I can fire up a small editor whenever and
> wherever I want in an application (without reloading the file each time).
> 
> Any interest in implementing TECO on an ST? Is this a sick idea?
> 
> maroC ddoTTodd Coram

using TECO is a sick idea (:-)

seriously i don't think that you are power mad and all of your requests 
are very reasonable just harder than blazes to implement, consider for 
example that redirection of i/o (dup) doesn't work with code generated
by some compilers and does work with others, and to do most of what you
want (which again i feel is reasonable) you need MocLisp ......

give me a solution and i'll implement it
-- 
----
		It aint life that gets me down, it's gravity

Name:	James M. Turner
Mail:	Imagen Corp. 2650 San Tomas Expressway, P.O. Box 58101
        Santa Clara, CA 95052-8101
AT&T:	(408) 986-9400
UUCP:	...{decvax,ucbvax}!decwrl!imagen!turner
CompuServe: 76327,1575
GEnie     : D-ARCANGEL

phr@ernie.Berkeley.EDU (Paul Rubin) (09/26/86)

In article <8609241321.AA07588@jade.Berkeley.Edu> ZCSTIN05@UDCVM.BITNET (Todd Coram) writes:
>So GNUEMACS is too massive for the ST... Is there a REALLY decent editor
>out there for the ST that an EMACS addict can live with?
>Micro-Emacs is nice and powerful, but it ain't EMACS. (Actually, the only
>real EMACS is the original one written in TECO. GNUEMACS is considered an
>EMACS-like editor.)

No, according to the GNU Emacs Manual by Richard M. Stallman, GNU
Emacs is the Unix/GNU incarnation of the advanced, self-documenting,
customizable, extensible real-time display editor Emacs.  It is a "real"
Emacs, as opposed to nonextensible editors with Emacs-like command
bindings ("ersatz emacses").  At least, that is the distinction that
RMS makes, and he is the author of both GNU Emacs and the original (Teco)
Emacs.

>Any interest in implementing TECO on an ST? Is this a sick idea?
Yes, it is a sick idea.  A TECO with enough stuff to run TECO Emacs,
even if such a thing is possible on an ST, would result in an Emacs
almost as big as GNU Emacs.  Porting GNU Emacs is probably a reasonable
idea for a 2MB+ ST, as mentioned here before.