LYMAN@IASSNS.BITNET.UUCP (01/25/87)
This is a refinement of my previous question about Appleworks. What is the best text editor out there (how to start a world war). To be more specific: 1) I am mainly going to be editing files to be up/down-loaded from my main host with Laserwriter, TeX, and those niceties. I would like to do my editing locally, therefore I would prefer either no embedded control characters, or an easy conversion facility. My current communication software is in Pascal, but I have a Dos 3.3 text file to Pascal and vice versa utility, so I'm not completely picky about formats. 2) It has to be a screen editor and preferably as close to my beloved emacs as possible. Rebindable keys would be wonderful. 3) It has to recognize my old Sup'R'Terminal Bd and shift key mod. The candidates I've seen advertised so far are AppleWorks (yes I know it does more than word processing) and Word Perfect. Any others out there? P.S. <unrelated> I have Pascal system 1.1, did Apple go further with this system (remember this was inherited), and if so what improvements have been made. The Pascal editor is moderately tortuous. It is especially frustrating that Esc means kill last change, rather than accept as in Vi. Lyman The man with the boring, but mercifully short, sign-off.
mikec@tekred.UUCP (01/26/87)
In article <8701241720.aa11929@SPARK.BRL.ARPA> LYMAN@IASSNS.BITNET writes: >P.S. <unrelated> I have Pascal system 1.1, did Apple go further with this system >(remember this was inherited), and if so what improvements have been made. The >Pascal editor is moderately tortuous. It is especially frustrating that Esc >means kill last change, rather than accept as in Vi. Apple Pascal is up to version 1.3. It works with 3.5" drives and the extended memory available on the //e or //c. It's pretty much the same thing, but there is an upgrade available...I'll post the address later. The price is $125. You'll have to send the manual cover or something as proof of ownership. The new manual, 1.3, is much nicer (and heavier). The ESC button bothered me, until I remembered that when you press ESC after an insert or delete, the text is copied into the buffer. So all you have to do after typing ESC is press "C" (for copy) and then "B" (for from buffer). It will restore what ESC destroyed. This has been a life saver for me several times. Another thing you might be able to do is use the setup utility to remap the keyboard so that the esc and ^C keys are reversed. I haven't tried this, but it shouldn't be hard to do it on a backup disk as an experiment. The program is located on the APPLE3: volume. -- -- Mike A. Combs GEnie: mike.combs MCI: mcombs tektronix!tekgen!tekred!mikec ^--The "A" is for: "Accidently erased the files". terrorist, contras, drugs, Iran, secret, NSA, CIA <- NSA line-eater food :-(
halp@batcomputer.UUCP (01/28/87)
Sender:B.P. Halpern, Psychology & Neurobiology, Cornell, Ithaca In article <8701241720.aa11929@SPARK.BRL.ARPA> LYMAN@IASSNS.BITNET writes: >more than word processing) and Word Perfect. Any others out there? > >P.S. <unrelated> I have Pascal system 1.1, did Apple go further with this system The current version of Apple Pascal is 1.3. It is a major improvement over earlier versions, and has a very good manual. Its editor is better than previous versions. Howver, to get a REALLY good Apple Pascal editor, find Advanced System Editor v1.0 from Volition Systems (they seem to have gone out of business). It wont run under Apple Pascal v1.3, but will with 1.1 or 1.2. B.P. Halpern
rbthomas@caip.UUCP (01/31/87)
> 2) It has to be a screen editor and preferably as close to my beloved emacs as > possible. Rebindable keys would be wonderful. There is a very nice emacs available for the 128K IIe, (it's called Amacs) which you can order for under 100 dollars from the developer, who lives in Boston somewhere. If you are interested, send me email and I will look it up. It has rebindable keys, but only a very limited programmability (it all has to fit in 128K, remember!) It cannot deal with files that are larger than can fit in its in-memory buffer, because it does not use a disk scratch file. On the other hand, it is quite fast, because it doesn't have to go to disk for anything. The biggest problem I have with it has nothing to do with amacs at all. My problem is that everything that runs on the Apple II that needs to do text editing, already has its own text editor built in, and each of these editors are incompatible with all the others! Amacs is an excellent stand-alone editor, but I don't use it as often as I would like, because I can't invoke it from inside (say) appleworks or (say again) merlin-pro. Also, I have had poor luck getting it to integrate with Kayan Pascal which does have a stand-alone editor, so substituting Amacs for it should be a breeze, right? Actually, the problems with substituting Amacs for the Kayan editor are nearly all on the Kayan side. Kayan has a 'library' file that it expects to be loaded, and does not check for when it starts up. Amacs doesn't know from nothing about Kayan's library file, so it uses that memory area for something (I dont know or care what.) So when switching back to Kayan from Amacs, it blows up! Grump! Maybe things are better with the new version of Kayan. Rick Thomas rbthomas@caip.rutgers.edu
ranger@ecsvax.UUCP (02/03/87)
Rick, What do you think about Kayan Pascal? I have seen it advertised and reviewed but I haven't got a users view of it. Thanks, Rick Fincher ranger@ecsvax
mikec@tekred.UUCP (02/06/87)
In article <2638@ecsvax.UUCP> ranger@ecsvax.UUCP (Rick N. Fincher) writes: >What do you think about Kayan Pascal? I have seen it advertised and >reviewed but I haven't got a users view of it. I'm an almost user of Kyan Pascal. It's got potential... :-( Pros: Runs under ProDOS, no licensing fees, compiles to stand alone applications. Development is done in Kix, a command shell on top of ProDOS that acts like Unix. (copy, dir, rm commands, etc.) Major flaw: No strings. Also, functions cannot return structured types, like records. (The latter is ISO level 0 standard, so excusable, but still awful to have to work under). program yech; var str: array [1..10] of char; begin str:= 'Hi '; end. Note that you have to pad out the assignment of str with spaces out to the total length of the definition. I could live with that if I only used strings 10 characters long, but I define them to be length 80. Until they add strings (and the tech support promises this reluctently), I don't recommend it. I must say that I really like the kix shell, except that it eats LOTS of disk space (use an 800K disk) and is slow (okay, use a LARGE RAM disk). And the editor they supply really stinks, and has some bugs with larger files. Kyan supports chaining programs, and include files, but not precompiled libraries, or overlays. Anything else? I'm assuming here that you're familiar with the "normal" features of pascal compilers, so I've only pointed out the significant departures. yoyoy can't Turbo Pascal run under ProDOS? -- -- Mike A. Combs GEnie: mike.combs MCI: mcombs tektronix!tekgen!tekred!mikec ^--The "A" is for: "Accidently erased the files". terrorist, contras, drugs, Iran, secret, NSA, CIA <- NSA line-eater food :-(
CS656@OUACCVMB.BITNET (02/25/88)
I have been using ORCA/M 4.1 for a little over a year now and am now in the process of learning the MANX C65-c system. As much as I like ORCA, it and Manx seem to have the same shortcoming, namely the editor. They both give prov isions for adding a new editor but which one to use? It would be really great to use Appleworks since I already own it and Ultra macroworks but this results in a lot of trouble in going from AWP to TXT and back all of the time. To make things worse ORCA uses the Auxilary type to determine which compiler to use adding one more step. My main concern is the C system though. Does anyone have any suggestions for a good editor to add? Preferably one with a small number of segments and the ability to do Macros. Thanks Bob Church CS656@OUACCVMB