::scr Towards a better text editor

[Greg McCarroll]

* Simon Wistow (simon@twoshortplanks.com) wrote:
> My feelings on Emacs and Vi are, I think, pretty well known. I think they
> suck. I think that they make editing text, their raison d'etre, hard. Which is
> stupid.

well i for one think editors should edit text, not read news, not
read mail, they can of course be used by mail and news software to
edit messages, this make sense.

so what do i use, i use emacs, i always use it in text mode (-nw , as
in No Windows) and on most of the systems i used i dont care about
the < 1sec start up time, if i did i would use uemacs (microemacs)

im unlikely to change as i know its keystrokes well now, but i
cant understand people who want to play Elite, etc. in their editor

> http://www.nano-editor.org/nanodefault2.png

hmm, that reminds me of the editors for QuickBasic,Turbo C,Turbo Pascal,etc.
on DOS

> So what else should a text editor have? Should it have less? ARGUE WITH ME!

well i'm not sure a text editor should have anything more, but i do
think there is another class of application that should help with 
editing text - it would be some form of document file manager (beyond
the filesystem and its metaphor) to present text files and project
views before you enter the text editor

Greg

-- 
Greg McCarroll                                 http://217.34.97.146/~gem/