Home | Blog | Software | Reviews and Features | Forum | Help | Donate | About us
topbanner_forum
  *

avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • December 06, 2016, 10:06:13 AM
  • Proudly celebrating 10 years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Last post Author Topic: Windows editors - do they have to be so bad?  (Read 51519 times)

tranglos

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 1,079
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Windows editors - do they have to be so bad?
« Reply #50 on: April 12, 2009, 05:25:17 PM »
One thing that I love about KfW is the selective editing: You can specify a target pattern and view only those lines that contain that pattern; you can then edit them as a block or toggle back and forth instantly between full and restricted views.

EditPadPro has already been mentioned a number of times in this thread, and this is yet another thing it can do. Ctrl+F to open the search panel, enter your search pattern and press enter. Then click the "Fold" button to see only the lines containing your pattern. You can still edit the lines when folded, and unfold at any time. There's also a Highlight button to color-code the matches. (Keyboard shortcuts can be assigned to all these functions.)

You can also restrict edits to within vertical columns or inside rectangular blocks, overlay and fill blocks, etc.

EditPad Pro does have rectangular selection (an option under the Block menu), but it doesn't restrict editing to the marked area. Typing inside a rectangular block will replace the selection, which usualy produces something of a mayhem.

Em Editor does a little better with rectangular selection: whatever you type in one will be repeated in all selected lines. Useful e.g. to prepend a comment character to several lines. But Em Editor doesn't fold the text to show only matching lines.

xtabber

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 574
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Windows editors - do they have to be so bad?
« Reply #51 on: April 12, 2009, 09:42:13 PM »
I actually bought EditPadPro recently because there are times when I want to use a stream-oriented editor reather than a line-oriented editor like Kedit, and it seemed to have the best combination of features along with excellent speed and a light footprint, unlike some of the other editors I have worked with (e.g., SlickEdit).  Although I haven't given it a good workout yet, I find it very impressive so far and am very happy with the choice.

That said, folding in EditPadPro is not at all the same as selective editing in Kedit, because folding affects only the display, not the underlying document. In Kedit, you can restrict the editing scope to the visible lines, so that when you mark a rectangular block in the displayed text and copy that block elsewhere, the copied block will contain only the text that was visible in the restricted display. With folded text, the hidden lines would be included in the copy. You can also incrementally add or remove lines from the restricted display by specifying additional targets.

Restricting editing allows you to do things like right or left justify the contents of a rectangular block without affecting the text on the same lines outside of the block. These capabilities make Kedit an unequalled tool for editing flat file ascii databases and tabular data.  On the other hand, you can't search for a pattern that spans multiple lines, as you can in a stream-oriented editor, which is one reason I sometimes need one of the latter.

mwb1100

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 1,522
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Windows editors - do they have to be so bad?
« Reply #52 on: April 13, 2009, 12:22:48 AM »
There's an editor I have not heard of before coming up on BDJ in a few days - HippoEDIT (can't say I'm fond of the name, but that doesn't really matter): 


It seems interesting, and the little bit I've put it though it seems worth looking into more (which I don't really have time for at the moment). Does anyone else have any experience with this that they could post?

rjbull

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • default avatar
  • Posts: 2,925
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Windows editors - do they have to be so bad?
« Reply #53 on: April 13, 2009, 03:48:17 PM »
Speaking up for EmEditor again :)

Its licensing is not per-installation, but per-user.

I read it as per-installation.  Will have to take another look.

Quote
Since I bought a License for EmEditor back in version 5 or 6, and it's still good in version 8, it's quite generous :)

They're already talking about version 9  ;)


[edit]
Ah, I see the confusion over the license.  EmEditor Web site says:

Quote

You must obtain a license for each computer you install the software on. Therefore, a license is needed for each terminal computer on a network, including remote terminal computers. If this software is for personal usage and not installed on corporate computers, you can install up to 5 computers for your use only.
If this software is installed on a portable drive such as a USB drive, one portable drive equals to one computer as described above.

I mostly use software at work, so read the license as per-installation for my purposes.  It isn't clear whether buying a license primarily for work, but with one's own money, also confers a right for personal use at home.
[/edit]

« Last Edit: April 13, 2009, 04:00:57 PM by rjbull »

broken85

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 88
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Windows editors - do they have to be so bad?
« Reply #54 on: April 13, 2009, 04:07:41 PM »
If you buy it for yourself, and use it for yourself, even if it's on the job, I think (hope) that's still considered personal use. I use EmEditor on my home PC and my laptop, which I also use for work, and that was my assumption based on the license.
--
Ben M

Eóin

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,401
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Windows editors - do they have to be so bad?
« Reply #55 on: April 13, 2009, 04:20:56 PM »
My understanding was that the spirit of a personal license versus commercial comes into play if it is the company that is buying it versus an individual. But the specifics are usually a bit ambiguous in most cases.

Jussi Jumppanen

  • Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • **
  • default avatar
  • Posts: 35
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Windows editors - do they have to be so bad?
« Reply #56 on: April 14, 2009, 01:30:57 AM »
Quote
I've just been looking at a few more Windows editors. Originally, I
 was looking for these features:
 
 Automatic back-ups
 Bookmarks
 Edit multiple files (tabbed interface?)

Zeus has all these feature: http://www.zeusedit.com

Quote
Ability to specify filters as external user tools (most seem  to unable to cope with redirection symbols)
I am not exactly sure what you mean by a redirection filter?

When the editor runs an external tool it will put in it's own hook to capture the output. If you redirect this output there will be nothing for the editor to capture.

Quote
In almost all the Windows editors I've seen, you have to use the mouse, or Shift-arrow keys, to mark text.

Zeus has several marking options including line, block, column, ragged or cua marking modes.

The marking can be done using just the keyboard, just the mouse or a combination of both.

Quote
If you press almost any other key, you lose the marked area and have to start again.

This is a Windows standard so I suspect that is why most windows editors do this. But in Zeus this is configurable.

Quote
Compare this with WordStar-style editors.

FWIW Zeus has a WordStar keyboard emulation mode.

Quote
True, I believe Boxer and TED Notepad both have limited work-arounds, but not as good.
If the Zeus WordStar emulation is broken then I would suggest reporting it as a bug to the Zeus forum:

   http://www.zeusedit.com/forum

Quote
Do Windows editors really have to be so bad?

Definitely not and I don't think all of them are ;)

Jussi Jumppanen
Author: Zeus for Windows IDE
« Last Edit: April 14, 2009, 01:33:16 AM by Jussi Jumppanen »

allen

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,192
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Windows editors - do they have to be so bad?
« Reply #57 on: April 14, 2009, 11:03:49 PM »
There's an editor I have not heard of before coming up on BDJ in a few days - HippoEDIT (can't say I'm fond of the name, but that doesn't really matter): 


It seems interesting, and the little bit I've put it though it seems worth looking into more (which I don't really have time for at the moment). Does anyone else have any experience with this that they could post?

I've been playing with it a bit, and wow -- it's *really* powerful, really extensible; actively devolped and has an active support forum.  For 15 bucks, it'd be a shame not to add this to my text editor collection.

wraith808

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 8,406
  • "In my dreams, I always do it right."
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Windows editors - do they have to be so bad?
« Reply #58 on: April 15, 2009, 10:14:45 AM »
I've been playing with it too, and I might pick it up for $15 bucks.  To me, at least, it doesn't have any features to make it stand out from the crowd, but I'm a sucker for cheap software that does what it does well.

rjbull

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • default avatar
  • Posts: 2,925
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Windows editors - do they have to be so bad?
« Reply #59 on: April 16, 2009, 03:37:25 AM »
If you buy it for yourself, and use it for yourself, even if it's on the job, I think (hope) that's still considered personal use. I use EmEditor on my home PC and my laptop, which I also use for work, and that was my assumption based on the license.

Here's what's in the Help file for EmEditor 8.04:
Quote

You must obtain a license for each computer you install the software on. Therefore, a license is needed for each terminal computer on a network, including remote terminal computers. If this software is for personal usage and not installed on corporate computers, you can install up to 5 computers for your use only.
If this software is installed on a portable drive such as a USB drive, one portable drive equals to one computer as described above

Which I read to mean that I have to treat it as a single-installation license because I use it at work, even though I paid my own money.

Quoting Eóin:
Quote
But the specifics are usually a bit ambiguous in most cases.

You never typed a truer word...

Hmmm, time to contact Emurasoft.

rjbull

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • default avatar
  • Posts: 2,925
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Windows editors - do they have to be so bad?
« Reply #60 on: April 16, 2009, 03:45:25 AM »
There's an editor I have not heard of before coming up on BDJ in a few days - HippoEDIT

The code-folding screenshot, and even the outliner-like features on the Web site, are very reminiscent of Notepad++.  Is that just convergent evolution?


rjbull

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • default avatar
  • Posts: 2,925
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Windows editors - do they have to be so bad?
« Reply #61 on: April 16, 2009, 04:01:24 AM »
Zeus has all these feature: http://www.zeusedit.com
[...]
I am not exactly sure what you mean by a redirection filter?

When the editor runs an external tool it will put in it's own hook to capture the output. If you redirect this output there will be nothing for the editor to capture.

I use lots of DOS and Windows console-mode ports of Unix command-line tools, like sed, awk, tr, comm, etc.  These normally work by taking input from STDIN and sending transformed (filtered, I suppose) output to STDOUT.  Many editors allow you to define user tools, but they often invoke them by means other than a command shell.  If there's no command shell, there's (as I understand it) no access to STDIN/STDOUT and the redirection process, so one can't use tools that operate as filters, at least not at all easily.  By contrast, consider TED Notepad.  It presumably uses a hidden command shell, because you can define STDIN/STDOUT filters as user tools, mark a block of text, hit the hotkey for that tool, and have the transformed text over-write the existing block.  Very convenient.

Quote
Quote
If you press almost any other key, you lose the marked area and have to start again.

This is a Windows standard so I suspect that is why most windows editors do this. But in Zeus this is configurable.

Another piece of Microsoft stupidity that has to be fixed by the aftermarket...

Quote
Quote
Compare this with WordStar-style editors.

FWIW Zeus has a WordStar keyboard emulation mode.

I was aware of this, but I should make it clear I'm not a coder, other than AWK scripts and batch files.  The latest version of Zeus is a 10 Mb download - not that out of the way nowadays, but many competent editors are much smaller and presumably faster loading - and costs $USD 69.95.  I'm sure one gets what one pays for, but it might be too much for me.  On the other hand, if I'd bought it first, maybe I wouldn't be on this quest    :-[

f0dder

  • Charter Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 9,029
  • [Well, THAT escalated quickly!]
    • View Profile
    • f0dder's place
    • Read more about this member.
    • Donate to Member
Re: Windows editors - do they have to be so bad?
« Reply #62 on: April 16, 2009, 04:15:12 AM »
STDIN/STDOUT/STDERR work irrespectively of a command shell - when you use win32 CreateProcess, you can override those handles at will. Even GUI processes can use stdin/stdout/stderr, not just console processes.

Quote
Quote
Quote
If you press almost any other key, you lose the marked area and have to start again.
This is a Windows standard so I suspect that is why most windows editors do this. But in Zeus this is configurable.
Another piece of Microsoft stupidity that has to be fixed by the aftermarket...
Dunno if it's stupid, I guess it depends on what you grew up with. Most of the time, with my usage habits, this is a decent enough default. For a serious editor, I prefer also having the option of persistent selection, as well as mark-begin + mark-end.
- carpe noctem

Jussi Jumppanen

  • Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • **
  • default avatar
  • Posts: 35
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Windows editors - do they have to be so bad?
« Reply #63 on: April 16, 2009, 09:29:11 PM »
Many editors allow you to define user tools, but they often invoke them by means other than a command shell.  If there's no command shell, there's (as I understand it) no access to STDIN/STDOUT and the redirection process,
Zeus runs its tools as a hidden process and captures the STDOUT/STDERR output of the tool to a tool window within the editor. But it does not hook in to the STDIN of the tool so there is no way for the user to talk to the tool from within Zeus.

To get STDIN working from within Zeus requires something like Tee: http://www.zeusedit....m/viewtopic.php?t=74

Quote
By contrast, consider TED Notepad.  It presumably uses a hidden command shell, because you can define STDIN/STDOUT filters as user tools.
Since TED Notepad hooks in to STDIN I assume that means you can type inside of TED Notepad and that input is sent to the tool. That is nice :Thmbsup:

Quote
(You can) mark a block of text, hit the hotkey for that tool, and have the transformed text over-write the existing block.  Very convenient.
It's possible run a tool from within a Zeus script and since scripts can be written in Python, Lua, JavaScript, VBScript, even Tcl, with a bit of scripting it is possible to do almost anything with the tool output.

Quote
The latest version of Zeus is a 10 Mb download - not that out of the way nowadays
Zeus itself is only about 800 kBytes but it ships with 19 other dlls that are about 6 megs in size. But of those 19 dlls only about 3 are essential and in fact reset can even be deleted.

Quote
but many competent editors are much smaller and presumably faster loading
Zeus starts in less than a second and it can open a 15 meg file in about 3 seconds. Normal files open in less than a second to load.

Quote
I'm sure one gets what one pays for, but it might be too much for me.  On the other hand, if I'd bought it first, maybe I wouldn't be on this quest.
Zeus costs nothing to try and the trial version is fully functional and runs for 45 days ;)

tide

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • default avatar
  • Posts: 84
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Windows editors - do they have to be so bad?
« Reply #64 on: April 17, 2009, 01:13:57 AM »
Jussi,

While Zeus is a very capable text editor and I do like it a lot, I have one complaint about it. Revisions come infrequently with trivial or barely noticeable improvements and upgrade prices are way out of line with the meager improvements.

I am a registered Zeus user who paid for my last upgrade about four years ago. I would be far happier knowing that my text editor were under continued development and improvement. I would gladly pay for upgrades in that case. As it stands, minor upgrades should be free to registered users.

widgewunner

  • Member
  • Joined in 2009
  • **
  • Posts: 90
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Zeus has old regex engine?
« Reply #65 on: April 17, 2009, 02:49:53 PM »
I just looked at the Zeus webpage and must admit I am impressed. However, after reading some of the forum, it appears that Zeus has been (and may still be) using an older regular expression engine. Is this still true?

Jussi Jumppanen

  • Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • **
  • default avatar
  • Posts: 35
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Windows editors - do they have to be so bad?
« Reply #66 on: April 18, 2009, 10:49:29 PM »
I have one complaint about it. Revisions come infrequently with trivial or barely noticeable improvements and upgrade prices are way out of line with the meager improvements.
The Zeus 3.96 version has had free upgrades since 19 th Jan 2007: http://www.zeusedit....um/viewforum.php?f=6
Quote
As it stands, minor upgrades should be free to registered users.
They are ;)

Jussi Jumppanen

  • Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • **
  • default avatar
  • Posts: 35
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Windows editors - do they have to be so bad?
« Reply #67 on: April 18, 2009, 11:08:57 PM »
However, after reading some of the forum, it appears that Zeus has been (and may still be) using an older regular expression engine. Is this still true?
Zeus uses a unix/perl style of regular expression engine. Another user suggested the engine in Zeus is old, but I've never really understood what it is that makes an engine old or new?

Recently I wrote a C# project that made extensive use of the Microsoft C# regular expression object. All the regular expressions used in that project where written and tested in Zeus and they worked just fine in the C# regular expression object. 

tide

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • default avatar
  • Posts: 84
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Windows editors - do they have to be so bad?
« Reply #68 on: April 19, 2009, 05:34:02 AM »

The Zeus 3.96 version has had free upgrades since 19 th Jan 2007: http://www.zeusedit....um/viewforum.php?f=6
Quote
As it stands, minor upgrades should be free to registered users.
They are ;)


I have one complaint about it. Revisions come infrequently with trivial or barely noticeable improvements and upgrade prices are way out of line with the meager improvements.

Excuse me, but I am running the five year old version 3.94a and now you're at 3.96r? That change is in the SECOND DECIMAL PLACE of the revision number. That's supposed to be MAJOR?

Your upgrade page says

"This upgrade option is available to any Zeus user running the older 3.9x version who wishes to upgrade to the latest version."

and the cost of that would be $49.95.

allen

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,192
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Windows editors - do they have to be so bad?
« Reply #69 on: April 19, 2009, 06:57:37 PM »
Excuse me, but I am running the five year old version 3.94a and now you're at 3.96r? That change is in the SECOND DECIMAL PLACE of the revision number. That's supposed to be MAJOR?

Your upgrade page says

"This upgrade option is available to any Zeus user running the older 3.9x version who wishes to upgrade to the latest version."

and the cost of that would be $49.95.

But that's a-z then a-r, plus 2 decimal places -- that's at least 36 point changes ;P

Jussi Jumppanen

  • Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • **
  • default avatar
  • Posts: 35
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Windows editors - do they have to be so bad?
« Reply #70 on: April 19, 2009, 08:14:30 PM »
Quote
Excuse me, but I am running the five year old version 3.94a and now you're at 3.96r?

Zeus is actually at 3.96s ;)

Quote
That change is in the SECOND DECIMAL PLACE of the revision number. That's supposed to be MAJOR?

Zeus has never really had a MAJOR version number. The first and last MAJOR version number was back in the days of 3.0 when the editor was completely re-written when compared to the earlier 2.75 version.

After that point releases came out ever 8-10 months and with each new release the first decimal place of the version was incremented.

Move on 9 years using this approach and there is no more room to increment the version number and the version number can't go to 4.0 since there are no plans to re-write the current 3.x code base :(

So solution was to move the version increment to the second decimal place.

Now that also worked for a while (i.e. 3.91, 3.92, 3.93, 3.94, 3.95 etc) but it's obvious this scheme is also doomed to fail.

So move on to 2007 and this all has to change. Rather than releasing every 8-10 months, releases are now being done more frequently and to designate the version a letter is added to the version number.

Now while this scheme is also going to run into trouble some time in the future, at least there are a lot more numbers to play with ;)

Quote
I am running the five year old version 3.94a

While the version number may not have change much, the version 3.96s is nothing like the 3.94a version.

In fact the 3.94a version is so different from the latest Zeus it can be downloaded free of charge from this link:

http://www.zeusedit....m/z300/ze32r394a.zip

It's like a Zeus Lite version ;)

« Last Edit: April 19, 2009, 08:23:30 PM by Jussi Jumppanen »

mwb1100

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 1,522
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Windows editors - do they have to be so bad?
« Reply #71 on: April 19, 2009, 10:13:08 PM »
In fact the 3.94a version is so different from the latest Zeus it can be downloaded free of charge from this link:

http://www.zeusedit....m/z300/ze32r394a.zip

It's like a Zeus Lite version ;)

Jussi:

Thanks for the link. By any chance is there a change history or list of features added since 3.94a so someone using it might now what they are missing out on?
« Last Edit: April 19, 2009, 10:26:42 PM by mwb1100 »

kartal

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 1,529
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Windows editors - do they have to be so bad?
« Reply #72 on: April 19, 2009, 10:14:33 PM »
I dig it when developers provide detailed list of fixes and changes, that shows that the developer is not lazy, slopy and rather dedicated and disciplined person.

Quote
Jussi:

Thanks for the link. By any change is there a change history or list of features added since 3.94a so someone using it might now what they are missing out on?

urlwolf

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,797
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Windows editors - do they have to be so bad?
« Reply #73 on: April 20, 2009, 02:56:02 AM »
just tried TED, and it seems it doesn't work on windows server 2008 64. The search function fails; I copy a word from the text, search for it, and it says 'word not found' :)

tide

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • default avatar
  • Posts: 84
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Windows editors - do they have to be so bad?
« Reply #74 on: April 20, 2009, 04:09:20 AM »
Jussi,

You are, of course, free to use whatever version numbering scheme you wish.

All I can tell you is that from this user's perspective and experience I didn’t see real value in upgrading. I upgraded to version 3.94a from 3.93 for which I paid full price less than one year earlier. I regarded the upgrade price to be too high and was very disappointed to find that the two versions were virtually indistinguishable to me.

So versions 3.95 and 3.96 come along and my experience with previous Zeus upgrades tells me the upgrade cost is far too high relative to the improvements and feature set. Can you see how a user might arrive at that conclusion? I suspect you might sell more copies/upgrades if you were to adopt versioning that is more in line with the rest of the world.

I know I would happily have upgraded (at least twice!!) had I perceived value in doing so. Now I just feel left out in the cold.

In any case, thanks for taking the time to explain your position even though it's not one that this customer can agree with.