|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 13 new of 32 responses total. |
remmers
|
|
response 20 of 32:
| 
Dec 12 17:46 UTC 2010 |
Re resp:17 - I was primarily an Emacs user but shifted preferences over
the last few years. Probably has something to do with retiring and no
longer being involved with large software projects so much. I've also
shifted from Linux with its X Window graphical interface to OS X. Emacs
is great in an X Window environment, not as much (or at least, not
clearly superior to Vim) with a terminal interface.
|
cross
|
|
response 21 of 32:
|
Dec 13 15:20 UTC 2010 |
Aquamacs wasn't to your liking?
|
remmers
|
|
response 22 of 32:
|
Dec 13 15:49 UTC 2010 |
Aquamacs is ok, but I don't actually do software development on the Mac.
|
cross
|
|
response 23 of 32:
|
Dec 13 16:33 UTC 2010 |
Huh. Why not, if I may ask? I find it's a comfortable environment for things
like that.
|
remmers
|
|
response 24 of 32:
|
Dec 13 18:39 UTC 2010 |
What programming I do these days (which isn't much compared to what I
did before retirement) I tend to do on FreeBSD and OpenBSD systems,
where my access is via a terminal connection.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 25 of 32:
|
Dec 18 15:38 UTC 2010 |
I am not a full-time programmer, and might work on 3 or 4 programming
projects per year. In between that time, I lose a lot of familiarity
with languages, and so for me an important feature of any programming
text editor is syntax checking, and text highlighting.
re 2: I've been checking out SciTE, and so far am liking it quite a bit.
|
remmers
|
|
response 26 of 32:
|
Dec 18 17:57 UTC 2010 |
Syntax-highlighting is useful to me as well. Both emacs and vim do a
reasonably good job of it.
|
kentn
|
|
response 27 of 32:
|
Dec 18 18:03 UTC 2010 |
What is nice is being able to "tweak" the syntax highlighting for a
language. Again, emacs and vim do a pretty job of that, too. Some
editors have syntax highlighting but it is very limited in what it can
do. Having the ability to add a new language for highlighting is also a
good feature. Not all editors support that.
|
bellstar
|
|
response 28 of 32:
|
Dec 19 20:52 UTC 2010 |
Re #25:
I dropped jEdit into the RHEL installation I have at work and am enjoying its
nice directory browser pane :-) Had to replace gcj with Sun's own for it to
run. Sadly, text rendering is painfully slow when I turn on font smoothing.
|
dtk
|
|
response 29 of 32:
|
Jan 1 02:34 UTC 2013 |
When I am working in a text-only environment, such as an SSH session, or
if I am doing a quick edit that does not justify starting a full
programming editor, I tend to revert back to VI. When I am working on
something larger, I usually revert to Komodo (Active State). It works
well, is the same in Windows or Linux, and is language-aware, without
being the bloated monster that is Jedit/Eclipse/Rational RSA. I also
like that it doesn't force you into the model of a project, if all you
are working on is a single code or a single module.
|
kentn
|
|
response 30 of 32:
|
Jan 1 15:58 UTC 2013 |
How much does Komodo cost now?
|
dtk
|
|
response 31 of 32:
|
Jan 6 22:25 UTC 2013 |
resp: 30 - The editor-only version (which is still pretty
fully-featured) is free. The IDE version, which integrates debugging,
source code management and a few other features is about 300$ as of Jan
2013. I have been happy with the free version. -DTK
|
kentn
|
|
response 32 of 32:
|
Jan 6 22:52 UTC 2013 |
Yeah, I'd prefer the IDE for Perl work, but $300 is quite a bit
for an IDE, although it does come with some other tools that
are useful, so that makes it more worth it if you have the need.
|
