lrg7030@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Loren Rittle) (01/12/91)
Note: I moved this as I fear some sort of editor war coming up, let's make sure it takes place in comp.sys.amiga.advocacy! Adam Hill writes: > Wait for TurboText by Martin Tallifer. There is a demo of it on ab20.larc. > nasa.gov. Well, as a long time CygnusEd user, I can safely say that while TurboText looks ok [ARexx port (unlike CED, there is one for every edit window open, which is a nice touch that I have hoped CED would add for some time), powerful ARexx command set (like CED), user configurable menus (unlike CED), ``bookmarks'' (like CED), a feature they call folds (allows for hiding text, CED does not have this sort of thing built-in, but I wrote ARexx macros to do the same thing about 1-1/2years ago!), they also claim to support : ``Supports sophisticated text templates, including special template sets for C, Modula-2, Ada, Assembly, and COBOL programming'', the templates aren't too sophisticated or special. Not at all as powerful as those under LSE under VMS, which I would consider powerful enough to be of any use. It seems to get real confused if you hit the expand key more than once over the same `token' twice! :-)], BUT they are missing some powerful CED features that us power hungry users have come to expect, for example: NO undo to speak of! Once you even move the cursor from the last line edited, no undos can take place, ie they have a one line undo that it forgets about as soon as you move off the line! (Hell, I thought that Gold Disk was the only company making `Professional' software without undo features! :-) :-) Only two views into a file at one time, with each document opening into it's one window. This actually makes switching between docs a pain in the butt, IMHO. Count me out, I stick with the power of CED. But do get the demo, you may decide that TurboText is your cup of tea. But at the same price as CED with less power, why? Loren J. Rittle -- ``In short, this is the absolute coolest computer device ever invented!'' -Tom Denbo speaking about The VideoToaster by NewTek ``your pathetic architectures won't support it'' - Kent Paul Dolan ``Think about NewTek's VideoToaster! Now think about the Amiga!'' Loren J. Rittle lrg7030@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
sysop@tlvx.UUCP (SysOp) (01/20/91)
In article <1991Jan12.151711.17948@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>, lrg7030@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Loren Rittle) writes: > Note: I moved this as I fear some sort of editor war coming up, let's > make sure it takes place in comp.sys.amiga.advocacy! Really! I have seen other posts in other groups that belong here too. Now that I'm here, I feel much less inhibited than in the other groups, for some reason. ;-) > > Adam Hill writes: > > Wait for TurboText by Martin Tallifer. There is a demo of it on ab20.larc. > > nasa.gov. > .... > NO undo to speak of! Once you even move the cursor from the > last line edited, no undos can take place, ie they have a one > line undo that it forgets about as soon as you move off the line! > (Hell, I thought that Gold Disk was the only company making > `Professional' software without undo features! :-) :-) In the original message, I believe it was said that TurboText was better than "Brief". When it come to undo, Brief is incredible. You can undo ANYTHING. Every keystroke, every cut, paste, whatever. (Maybe there are some odd things that can't be un-done. There is no "redo" however. :-) Anyway, for any text editor to claim to be even "as good as Brief", it would need this level of undo; I use it all the time. If anyone can seriously claim any Amiga text editor to approach the level of Brief, I would like to hear about it. Also, someone posted recently about the availability of "crisp", a Brief clone for UNIX. If anyone ports this to Amiga, I'd be really really interested in it! :-) I was unsuccessful in compiling an older version of it on my UNIX PC. (Perhaps there is a new version out? Does anyone have an idea if it has been/could be ported to Amiga? UNIX PC?) > > Only two views into a file at one time, with each document opening > into it's one window. This actually makes switching between docs > a pain in the butt, IMHO. Multiple views can be very handy. I use them all the time with Brief. > > Count me out, I stick with the power of CED. But do get the demo, > you may decide that TurboText is your cup of tea. But at the > same price as CED with less power, why? Actually, with this discussion, I don't have much of a feel for these editors. (Maybe someone could compare CED to Brief, so I could relate to it? :-) I like AZ (I have version 1.1), and Stevie (a VI clone). AZ is nice (I especially like the mouse support and the keyboard defaults), but it has a serious lack of features. VI is, of course, cryptic, but after using UNIX at least I am familiar with it. I played with Uedit, but could not get used to it. I want Brief for Amiga. :-) But, since I don't do all that much on my Amiga with text, it's really not a big deal; AZ seems to work fine. (Is there a newer version?) > Loren J. Rittle lrg7030@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu