Yonderboy@cup.portal.com (Christopher Lee Russell) (12/27/90)
There are about a thousand different version of VI and EMACS on the lists of Panarthea@sun.com and Atari.archive... Does anybody have any opinions about which ones are best.. That GNU emacs looks huge, any advantage to it? I have been using SteVIe, but recently I have been getting errors loading in large files and it is kinda slow compared to some of the other editors I have been using.. Is Elvis any better? How about Jove.. I would like to know what other people are using for editors (especially for writting C source code)... VI seems to do about everything I want, but Emacs lets you have multiple windows (at least the one built into Gulam).. Well, any opinoions? ........Yonderboy@cup.portal.com
rosenkra@convex.com (William Rosencranz) (12/28/90)
first, some info i was not able to mail to some people... after posting mgif, i received several requests for PBMplus, which i mentioned in the README file. as far as i know, there is no full port of PBMplus to the ST, though it should be fairly simple with gcc (32-bit mode). it runs mostly on unix boxes as far as i know. it was posted to comp.sources.unix (or comp.sources.misc, i forget which) and should be available on one of the archive sites for these groups (e.g. uunet.uu.net). in addition, there are periodic additions to PBMplus which appear in alt.sources, too. i do know that there is support in PBMplus for GEM files (i THINK these will be degas-ish pi1, pi2, and pi3 files). PBM plus has its own formats for color, grayscale, and other images and can convert between a whole slew of other formats and do lots of image manipulations. it is a very nice package (and i wonder why it has not been ported to the ST, at least parts of it). it is rather large (several MB of source, as i recall). on to other things... In article <37252@cup.portal.com> Yonderboy@cup.portal.com (Christopher Lee Russell) writes: >There are about a thousand different version of VI and EMACS on the lists >of Panarthea@sun.com and Atari.archive... Does anybody have any opinions >about which ones are best.. opinions? i got a million! i have most of the zillion versions, collected over the years. i am an emacs user, so naturally i prefer emacs (no flame wars on this...PLEASE!!!). of all the emacs' out there, i prefer MicroEMACS, v 3.9n (i think i use "n"). i have 3.10something, but it no longer prints the status line in reverse video, and it does not seem to offer more than improved mouse support, which i don't use anyway. GNU emacs would be very attractive, but i could not get it to run because it insists on having the termcap file end in newlines (NOT cr-newlines, as is the convention with TOS/MSDOS text files). that was quite a while ago, it may be "fixed" now. an added plus with GNU emacs is the ability to use special elisp files to add new capabilites. this is possible with MicroEMACS as well, though if u use GNU emacs on another system, then u have little compatibility problems. both come with source, so u can always "fix" things to your liking. i have edited files larger than 150k bytes with microemacs with no problems. note that microemacs lisp is NOT the same as GNU emacs lisp. someday, i'll set up a drive just for all the GNU software, so i will probably end up with GNU emacs, if it is not too big, even for my mega4 (which normally i have going with a 2 MB ramdisk). [incidently, if someone can tell me how to get the status line in rev video with MicroEMACS 3.10, i'd appreciate that. without a recompile, that is, since i believe i would have to port it to Alcyon (SHEESH!!) or get gcc up and running.] i prefer emacs because of its language context sensitivity (in C and fortran though i write very little fortran on the ST) and because at this point in time, it is everywhere, at least in the unix world (what other world is there? :-). by "everywhere", i mean most pcs (generic), workstations, supers (yes, even cray :-) and minisupers, all the systems i am likely to encounter for the next 100 years. the argument that vi exists everywhere compared to emacs is no longer a valid one, IMHO. it takes a bit longer, perhaps, to learn emacs (say 20% longer), but IMHO it is a superior editor for programming. so if u are just learning an editor, i'd recommend learning enuf of both vi and emacs (say 10-15 commands) then pick one you feel more comfortable with and do most of your work with it. vi is modal, too, in that there is an "input" mode and a "command" mode. i personally hate that (there is no key marked "Esc" on a DECstation 3100, for example. Esc is used to terminate "input" mode in vi. that does not mean vi is bad, more probably it indicates DEC is not serious about unix. PLEASE, no flames on that either! except from ken olson hisself :-). of the various vi clones, i have made stevie 3.65 (or perhaps 3.95?) what comes up when i say "vi file", though that is about twice a year, so ask someone else about vi. it never bombed on me (i think elvis had some problems, at least the early version i got). elvis seems to be the prefered vi for Minix, though Minix itself has these limits on executable sizes, at least on the PC version (64k text + 64k data) which can severly limit what u can do. enjoy... -bill rosenkra@convex.com -- Bill Rosenkranz |UUCP: {uunet,texsun}!convex!c1yankee!rosenkra Convex Computer Corp. |ARPA: rosenkra%c1yankee@convex.com
ralph@laas.fr (Ralph P. Sobek) (01/02/91)
In article <37252@cup.portal.com> Yonderboy@cup.portal.com (Christopher Lee Russell) writes: | There are about a thousand different version of VI and EMACS on the lists | of Panarthea@sun.com and Atari.archive... Does anybody have any opinions | about which ones are best.. That GNU emacs looks huge, any advantage to it? It is Unix GNU emacs compatible for most everything (other than sub processes). The only thing is that it requires more than 1 Mb to do anything interesting. This doesn't mean to say that you cannot use on a 1040 ST. For certain functinality (such as bibtex-mode) it's the only way to go! | but Emacs lets you have multiple windows (at least the one built | into Gulam).. Also MG and UE310: all emacs! Cheers, -- Ralph P. Sobek Disclaimer: The above ruminations are my own. ralph@laas.fr Addresses are ordered by importance. ralph@laas.uucp, or ...!uunet!laas!ralph If all else fails, try: sobek@eclair.Berkeley.EDU =============================================================================== Proud new owner of a Mega 4 ST. What should I do with my *small* SH204 drive?