Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Richard Owlett]

On 09/02/2017 08:24 PM, Doug wrote:

[snip]
Do you have Kate on your system? You can open side-by-side versions of
that, and that's a fine text editor that you don't have to
know vi or anything esoteric to use it.

--doug



As I currently have the MATE desktop, it is not installed and the 
original motivation has passed.


However, reviewing Kate's homepage [https://kate-editor.org/] suggests 
it may have other desirable features. Synaptic reports ~150 packages 
would be installed but the additional disk space would not be 
significant. As I was already planning an upgrade to Stretch {>=9.1} 
with a heavily customized choice of packages this would be a convenient 
time to investigate Kate.


Thank you.

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[deloptes]

Gene Heskett wrote:

> I gave up on the kde breakage that never gets fixed by kde, and on this
> boxen, and one of my more well-endowed cnc boxes its TDE r14.0.0.x all
> the way down, so I am still running kmail 1.9, its had at least 99% of
> all the kde bugs swatted.  Its a fork of kde 3.5.
> 

Same here ... I even saw myself entitled to fix bugs for TDE, so that I may
have really useful environment. So kate-trinity rocks :)

>> I had same experience with GTK gedit & friends 14y ago ... since then
>> I don't want to hear about gnome or whatever alike ... but well, there
>> are allways exceptions - like gimp.
> 
> Which changes fast enough I have to learn it all over again everytime I
> need to use it.  Like adding captions and arrows, last upgrade uses a 1
> pt font for text and I had a heck of a time blowing it up to a usable
> size. I think there is an excedrin headache number for that. Has to
> be... :)

Indeed - however I have not seen anything better around :D
Thanks God, I do not need image editor that often.

regards

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Gene Heskett]

On Wednesday 06 September 2017 13:39:01 deloptes wrote:

> kamaraju kusumanchi wrote:
> > FWIW, I also thought that you lost 6 months of work based on what
> > you wrote initially. Happy to hear that the damage is much less. But
> > even that can be very frustrating, right?
> >
> > Along with the backups, may I suggest you to store all your work in
> > version control such as git so that even if the editor crashes, you
> > can recover everything up until the last commit.
>
> I use "ne" which luckily is part of the debian package repo. Great for
> work in console.
>
> For the GUI ... well we stayed with KDE3 on purpose - kate is great.
>
I gave up on the kde breakage that never gets fixed by kde, and on this 
boxen, and one of my more well-endowed cnc boxes its TDE r14.0.0.x all 
the way down, so I am still running kmail 1.9, its had at least 99% of 
all the kde bugs swatted.  Its a fork of kde 3.5.

> I had same experience with GTK gedit & friends 14y ago ... since then
> I don't want to hear about gnome or whatever alike ... but well, there
> are allways exceptions - like gimp.

Which changes fast enough I have to learn it all over again everytime I 
need to use it.  Like adding captions and arrows, last upgrade uses a 1 
pt font for text and I had a heck of a time blowing it up to a usable 
size. I think there is an excedrin headache number for that. Has to 
be... :)

> regards

Thanks kamaraju kusumanchi.

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page 

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Gene Heskett]

On Wednesday 06 September 2017 12:27:37 kamaraju kusumanchi wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 9:01 AM, Gene Heskett  
wrote:
> > The ability to edit the copy buffer in a different tab, doing a
> > buffer wide edit to change the axis references in the buffer, so
> > that those edits are done and stand a chance of being correct when
> > the main buffer has been scrolled to the point where the just edited
> > buffer is to be pasted back into the main file.
> >
> > If such an editor exists, I'll take it for a walk. But editors that
> > require more than 2 fingers to accomplish the copy/paste need not
> > apply. Same for editors whose fonts are stick figures one pixel wide
> > and can't be changed to something like "hack, bold".
>
> If I understand your workflow correctly, you might find the NrrwRgn
> plugin[1] for vim very useful.
>
> Say you have a very long file and would like to edit just 2-3
> paragraphs in it but keep the rest of the file untouched. You can open
> the file in vim, visually select the paragraphs to be edited (by V)
> and  then press :nr . This will open a new buffer with the selected
> lines. Once you make all the edits in the new buffer -> save -> close,
> the changes will automatically be integrated into the original file.
> You can then review the changes and save the original file.
>
> [1] Stable version of the plugin can be downloaded from
> https://vim.sourceforge.io/scripts/script.php?script_id=3075

Not exactly what I was describing.  Yes, I'd like to visually select 
those lines to be buffered/edited out of a much bigger file, but after 
the editing, allow me to select, without any effect of the previously 
selected source lines, a new place in the file to insert the edited 
buffer into.  So one could snip out a piece of code that refers to axis 
X, edit it to do the exact same thing for axis Y, and then re-insert it 
into the section of the main file in the same order but in the Y section 
to have Y behave as X, but with independent actions from X.  Such things 
as accelerations and such, subject to the same rules but affecting a 
different axis's motions.

Two basic ways to move a machine, one by servo motors which require a 
feedback to tell if the motion commanded is being done at the dynamic 
accuracy required, the other by stepper motors which dispense with the 
feedback from the motor, but depend on the motor doing precisely what it 
was told to do.  This costs less, but has limits to the start and stop 
acceleration profiles.  This means they need to have those profiles set 
so as to not exceed the motors ability to do it.  Within those limits, 
one is as accurate as the other, or can be made so by suitable gear 
ratios. The problem with steppers is how fast the drive currents thru 
the coils can be changed when the inductance of the coil enters into the 
picture.  Well tuned servo's can move several meters a second, 
developing good torque at 3 thousand rpms, but steppers are dragging 
their tongues on the floor and out of usable torque as low as 10 inches 
a minute or 150 rpms.  Only by going to very high voltages, with chopper 
regulated coil currents, can some of this be overcome. With that chopper 
regulated current comes noise, both acoustical and electrically 
radiated.  Noise enough to blow 3.3 volt control circuitry all to hell.

All of which has nothing to do with editors, just intended as background 
for some of the problems that have to be solved.  My choice of editor is 
one that doesn't play mixmaster with my code on the save. Gedit fails 
that test rather miserably and will do it in less than 100 edit 
sessions. At which point the whole file looks like a kitchenaide or 
mix-master was left to churn the files contents for several hours.  
Sometimes its salvageable with several more hours work, more often you 
are best calling up amrecover to at least get back what you had at 
shutdown last night. Then go looking for a different editor that does 
not destroy your days work.  geany hasn't (yet).

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page 

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[deloptes]

kamaraju kusumanchi wrote:

> FWIW, I also thought that you lost 6 months of work based on what you
> wrote initially. Happy to hear that the damage is much less. But even
> that can be very frustrating, right?
> 
> Along with the backups, may I suggest you to store all your work in
> version control such as git so that even if the editor crashes, you
> can recover everything up until the last commit.

I use "ne" which luckily is part of the debian package repo. Great for work
in console.

For the GUI ... well we stayed with KDE3 on purpose - kate is great.

I had same experience with GTK gedit & friends 14y ago ... since then I
don't want to hear about gnome or whatever alike ... but well, there are
allways exceptions - like gimp.

regards

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[kamaraju kusumanchi]

On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 9:01 AM, Gene Heskett  wrote:
>
> The ability to edit the copy buffer in a different tab, doing a buffer
> wide edit to change the axis references in the buffer, so that those
> edits are done and stand a chance of being correct when the main buffer
> has been scrolled to the point where the just edited buffer is to be
> pasted back into the main file.
>
> If such an editor exists, I'll take it for a walk. But editors that
> require more than 2 fingers to accomplish the copy/paste need not apply.
> Same for editors whose fonts are stick figures one pixel wide and can't
> be changed to something like "hack, bold".

If I understand your workflow correctly, you might find the NrrwRgn
plugin[1] for vim very useful.

Say you have a very long file and would like to edit just 2-3
paragraphs in it but keep the rest of the file untouched. You can open
the file in vim, visually select the paragraphs to be edited (by V)
and  then press :nr . This will open a new buffer with the selected
lines. Once you make all the edits in the new buffer -> save -> close,
the changes will automatically be integrated into the original file.
You can then review the changes and save the original file.

[1] Stable version of the plugin can be downloaded from
https://vim.sourceforge.io/scripts/script.php?script_id=3075

-- 
Kamaraju S Kusumanchi | http://raju.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Blog

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[tomas]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 10:02:45AM -0400, Dan Ritter wrote:

[...]

> Replace all that file and directory management with git.
> 
> edit /cncmaster/cnc-machine-A/config
> git commit /cncmaster/cnc-machine-A/config 

To harp on my previous post:

  git commit -am "Loosened the all-too tight path with the 3/8 gremlin tool"

> linuxcnc /cncmaster/cnc-machine-A/config
> 
> and when you want to go back to a previous version you can
> either get a diff to apply or pull the old version out directly.
> 
> Subversion (SVN) would also work well instead of git, here.
> git is more powerful, but not necessarily in a compelling way
> for you.

Oh, yes: no connectivity to server needed (a feature it shares
with hg, bazaar, darcs and some others).

Cheers
- -- tomás
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlmwCfIACgkQBcgs9XrR2kbxDgCfdQvx9a1znyWkVniexTV6vF/7
cKwAniZ6MzeNBfi1yVUcVlmiaQGnzi4c
=4Ol5
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Dan Ritter]

On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 02:31:08AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Wednesday 06 September 2017 00:09:31 kamaraju kusumanchi wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 7:37 AM, Gene Heskett  
> wrote:
> > > On Friday 17 March 2017 05:49:30 Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> > >> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 09:54:42AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:

> > > 3 times. The problem with that is that the status of the backup was
> > > 15 to 20 hours old, so I lost that days work and had to re-invent
> > > that particular batch of work.
> >
> > FWIW, I also thought that you lost 6 months of work based on what you
> > wrote initially. Happy to hear that the damage is much less. But even
> > that can be very frustrating, right?
> >
> > Along with the backups, may I suggest you to store all your work in
> > version control such as git so that even if the editor crashes, you
> > can recover everything up until the last commit.
> 
> I have considered something along those lines, but mentally I can't seem 
> to make the coupling between a single file that has to be ready to go 
> anytime I run linuxcnc -l (where the -l says to use the same config it 
> used the last time) and a git database that usually has to be compiled 
> before its capable of running.  Normally we keep a separate directory 
> for each machine configuration, although there may be N parallel 
> directories as the configuration is developed. 

So it looks like:

/cncmaster/cnc-machine-A-20150603.1/configfile
/cncmaster/cnc-machine-A-20150603.2/configfile
/cncmaster/cnc-machine-A-20150605.1/configfile
/cncmaster/cnc-machine-A-20150608.1/configfile
/cncmaster/cnc-machine-A-20150803.1/configfile
/cncmaster/cnc-machine-A-20150803.2/configfile
/cncmaster/cnc-machine-B-20150603.1/configfile
/cncmaster/cnc-machine-B-20150805.1/configfile
/cncmaster/cnc-machine-B-20150805.2/configfile

or something similar?

This is a perfect case for git (which does not require any
compilation).

Right now your workflow is, basically:

mkdir /cncmaster/cnc-machine-A-20170809.1
cp /cncmaster/cnc-machine-A-20150608.1/configfile \
   /cncmaster/cnc-machine-A-20170809.1/
edit /cncmaster/cnc-machine-A-20170809.1/configfile
linuxcnc /cncmaster/cnc-machine-A-20170809.1/configfile

wait
 inspect 
. sigh .
edit /cncmaster/cnc-machine-A-20170809.1/configfile

and loop until you get it right?

Replace all that file and directory management with git.

edit /cncmaster/cnc-machine-A/config
git commit /cncmaster/cnc-machine-A/config 
linuxcnc /cncmaster/cnc-machine-A/config

and when you want to go back to a previous version you can
either get a diff to apply or pull the old version out directly.

Subversion (SVN) would also work well instead of git, here.
git is more powerful, but not necessarily in a compelling way
for you.

-dsr-

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Gene Heskett]

On Wednesday 06 September 2017 03:12:36 Erik Christiansen wrote:

> On 06.09.17 02:31, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > On Wednesday 06 September 2017 00:09:31 kamaraju kusumanchi wrote:
> >
> > The total configuration generally is not a single file, usually
> > broken up according to its order in the programs bootup, first being
> > the basic config, then the first of what could be 2 or 3 .hal files,
> > some of which can't be run until the gui is started, then once the
> > gui is drawn, more gui for accessory tally's, spindle
> > speed/direction, and dials to replace the cranks that no longer
> > exist, usually written in xml or pyvcp, or gladevcp is done, which
> > adds the "hal pins" that connect the machine gui to the machine. It
> > can get complex.  This most recent lathe has over 1200 lines of code
> > just in the configuration files.  And I still do not have any
> > coolant or lube facilities under control.  Stuff I have yet to build
> > or buy. :)
>
> Gene, a version control utility allows you to commit a complete
> directory tree of as many config files as you wish, organised as
> desired. If we imagine them as source files not requiring compilation
> prior to use, then the versioning config repository is not so foreign.
>
> Having used cvs for decades, I am one of the dinosaurs still using it
> despite many more modern offerings having replaced it. It can be a pig
> if you mistreat it, and subversion is supposed to be better, Git has
> followers and detractors. Then there's mercury. I've used the latter
> two only very superficially. There'll be more users to advise on these
> more current offerings.
>
> A VCS only allows you to retrieve versions which have been checked in,
> but that might help if it encourages you to do that immediately at the
> end of an editing session, rather than exposing the edits to data loss
> during the hours before a midnight backup. And a pre-lunch commit
> minimises loss to half a day.
>
> But a simple scp or rsync snapshot to another host might be a quick
> stopgap?
>
> Erik

When I am finished with a particular edit, it gets saved on the spot, and 
a test run made immediately so I can fix my inevitable typu's.  The 
session is resaved after the typu is fixed, and if that runs ok, then 
the editor is closed, usually w/o a final save.  The save is 
my "commit".  The close is generally when the added function I was 
working on, works as I had it in mind to work. If that function is to be 
copy/pasted to another axis, a fresh editing session will be started. I 
don't generally add more than 10 to 50 LOC in any one session.

To that copy/paste end, there is one function that could be added to a 
good code editor, which may in fact exist but I've not found it yet.

The ability to edit the copy buffer in a different tab, doing a buffer 
wide edit to change the axis references in the buffer, so that those 
edits are done and stand a chance of being correct when the main buffer 
has been scrolled to the point where the just edited buffer is to be 
pasted back into the main file.

If such an editor exists, I'll take it for a walk. But editors that 
require more than 2 fingers to accomplish the copy/paste need not apply.  
Same for editors whose fonts are stick figures one pixel wide and can't 
be changed to something like "hack, bold".

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page 

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[tomas]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 05:12:36PM +1000, Erik Christiansen wrote:

[...]

> A VCS only allows you to retrieve versions which have been checked in,
> but that might help if it encourages you to do that immediately at the
> end of an editing session, rather than exposing the edits to data loss

[...]

What is't mentioned often (perhaps because those not using VCS have no
notion of it and those accustomed to don't realize because it has
become second nature) is that a VCS nudges you to attach some mumblings
to each commit ("disabled $foo after $script bit my small toe off").

Whenever you feel a bit disoriented about "where you are", this log
of mumblings is gold.

- -- t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlmvsHsACgkQBcgs9XrR2kYNFQCdFvidBPHa/3GoIxFvmQFMYka+
538AnRLXt1U8Bua4g4fsTclVzrR8nGCV
=a0/K
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Erik Christiansen]

On 06.09.17 02:31, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Wednesday 06 September 2017 00:09:31 kamaraju kusumanchi wrote:
> 
> The total configuration generally is not a single file, usually broken up 
> according to its order in the programs bootup, first being the basic 
> config, then the first of what could be 2 or 3 .hal files, some of which 
> can't be run until the gui is started, then once the gui is drawn, more 
> gui for accessory tally's, spindle speed/direction, and dials to replace 
> the cranks that no longer exist, usually written in xml or pyvcp, or 
> gladevcp is done, which adds the "hal pins" that connect the machine gui 
> to the machine. It can get complex.  This most recent lathe has over 
> 1200 lines of code just in the configuration files.  And I still do not 
> have any coolant or lube facilities under control.  Stuff I have yet to 
> build or buy. :)

Gene, a version control utility allows you to commit a complete
directory tree of as many config files as you wish, organised as
desired. If we imagine them as source files not requiring compilation
prior to use, then the versioning config repository is not so foreign.

Having used cvs for decades, I am one of the dinosaurs still using it
despite many more modern offerings having replaced it. It can be a pig
if you mistreat it, and subversion is supposed to be better, Git has
followers and detractors. Then there's mercury. I've used the latter two
only very superficially. There'll be more users to advise on these more
current offerings.

A VCS only allows you to retrieve versions which have been checked in,
but that might help if it encourages you to do that immediately at the
end of an editing session, rather than exposing the edits to data loss
during the hours before a midnight backup. And a pre-lunch commit
minimises loss to half a day.

But a simple scp or rsync snapshot to another host might be a quick
stopgap?

Erik

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Gene Heskett]

On Wednesday 06 September 2017 00:09:31 kamaraju kusumanchi wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 7:37 AM, Gene Heskett  
wrote:
> > On Friday 17 March 2017 05:49:30 Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> >> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 09:54:42AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> >> > gedit has caused me to have to start over again, 3 times, on a
> >> > 600+ line configuration file for machine control on several
> >> > occasions. As the file it trashed was 6 months worth of adding
> >> > new features to that machines control, that was not appreciated.
> >> > 1st time is a wtf?, 2nd time sends me a message, 3rd time I shut
> >> > it down w/o the save and never ran it again.
> >>
> >> Whilst this is very frustrating, one other thing it tells me is you
> >> need to set up a backup system (although you are quite right to
> >> abandon gedit based on your experiences)
> >
> > I do, I am a very longtime user of amanda, since 1998 TBE. I've
> > never contaminated my thinking with a windows install, going from a
> > coco3 with nitros9, to amigados, to linux at RH-5.0. amanda does all
> > 5 of these machines every night at about 1:20 AM and it got used all
> > 3 times. The problem with that is that the status of the backup was
> > 15 to 20 hours old, so I lost that days work and had to re-invent
> > that particular batch of work.
>
> FWIW, I also thought that you lost 6 months of work based on what you
> wrote initially. Happy to hear that the damage is much less. But even
> that can be very frustrating, right?
>
> Along with the backups, may I suggest you to store all your work in
> version control such as git so that even if the editor crashes, you
> can recover everything up until the last commit.

I have considered something along those lines, but mentally I can't seem 
to make the coupling between a single file that has to be ready to go 
anytime I run linuxcnc -l (where the -l says to use the same config it 
used the last time) and a git database that usually has to be compiled 
before its capable of running.  Normally we keep a separate directory 
for each machine configuration, although there may be N parallel 
directories as the configuration is developed. A milling machine may 
start out with 3 axis's of motion, and may have up to 9 degrees of 
movement freedom as accessories such as a rotating table, which may be 
mounted to the xy table with its axis of movement aligned with any of 
the other 3 axis's.  Or the actual cutting spindle may get mounted in 
such a manner as the be tiltable in both directions so it can reach into 
the nooks and crannies.  This is generally geared together 
electronically so that the cutting tool is motionless on the workpiece 
as it tilts unless you specifically drive it otherwise. This of course 
requires very carefull tool length calibrations to pull off well, but 
the math to sub-micron accuracy is already modularized.

The total configuration generally is not a single file, usually broken up 
according to its order in the programs bootup, first being the basic 
config, then the first of what could be 2 or 3 .hal files, some of which 
can't be run until the gui is started, then once the gui is drawn, more 
gui for accessory tally's, spindle speed/direction, and dials to replace 
the cranks that no longer exist, usually written in xml or pyvcp, or 
gladevcp is done, which adds the "hal pins" that connect the machine gui 
to the machine. It can get complex.  This most recent lathe has over 
1200 lines of code just in the configuration files.  And I still do not 
have any coolant or lube facilities under control.  Stuff I have yet to 
build or buy. :)



Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page 

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[kamaraju kusumanchi]

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 7:37 AM, Gene Heskett  wrote:
> On Friday 17 March 2017 05:49:30 Jonathan Dowland wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 09:54:42AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
>> > gedit has caused me to have to start over again, 3 times, on a 600+
>> > line configuration file for machine control on several occasions. As
>> > the file it trashed was 6 months worth of adding new features to
>> > that machines control, that was not appreciated. 1st time is a wtf?,
>> > 2nd time sends me a message, 3rd time I shut it down w/o the save
>> > and never ran it again.
>>
>> Whilst this is very frustrating, one other thing it tells me is you
>> need to set up a backup system (although you are quite right to
>> abandon gedit based on your experiences)
>
> I do, I am a very longtime user of amanda, since 1998 TBE. I've never
> contaminated my thinking with a windows install, going from a coco3 with
> nitros9, to amigados, to linux at RH-5.0. amanda does all 5 of these
> machines every night at about 1:20 AM and it got used all 3 times. The
> problem with that is that the status of the backup was 15 to 20 hours
> old, so I lost that days work and had to re-invent that particular batch
> of work.


FWIW, I also thought that you lost 6 months of work based on what you
wrote initially. Happy to hear that the damage is much less. But even
that can be very frustrating, right?

Along with the backups, may I suggest you to store all your work in
version control such as git so that even if the editor crashes, you
can recover everything up until the last commit.

-- 
Kamaraju S Kusumanchi | http://raju.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Blog

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Doug]

On 04/02/2017 07:13 AM, Tom Browder wrote:


On Sat, Apr 1, 2017 at 14:36 Fred > wrote:


On 04/01/2017 09:24 AM, Richard Owlett wrote:
> On 04/01/2017 10:55 AM, cbannis...@slingshot.co.nz
 wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 06:38:52AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
>>> The two files are nearly identical and need them displayed
>>> simultaneously
>>> for instant visual comparison. Opening one of the files read only
>>> would be
>>> acceptable but not preferable.


Try diffuse.

-Tom
Do you have Kate on your system? You can open side-by-side versions of 
that, and that's a fine text editor that you don't have to

know vi or anything esoteric to use it.

--doug

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Curt]

On 2017-04-01, Richard Owlett  wrote:
>
> On 03/16/2017 09:04 AM, I {the OP} had written:
> >
> > I don't need a diff tool exactly. I need to do a _visual_ comparison
> > to make sure I'm editing the right portion.
> > I might say I was looking for an "analog" not "digital" solution.
>

There's meld. 

-- 
"It might be a vision--of a shell, of a wheelbarrow, of a fairy kingdom on the
far side of the hedge; or it might be the glory of speed; no one knew." --Mrs.
Ramsay, speculating on why her little daughter might be dashing about, in "To
the Lighthouse," by Virginia Woolf.

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Tom Browder]

On Sat, Apr 1, 2017 at 14:36 Fred  wrote:

> On 04/01/2017 09:24 AM, Richard Owlett wrote:
> > On 04/01/2017 10:55 AM, cbannis...@slingshot.co.nz wrote:
> >> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 06:38:52AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> >>> The two files are nearly identical and need them displayed
> >>> simultaneously
> >>> for instant visual comparison. Opening one of the files read only
> >>> would be
> >>> acceptable but not preferable.


Try diffuse.

-Tom

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Fred]

On 04/01/2017 09:24 AM, Richard Owlett wrote:

On 04/01/2017 10:55 AM, cbannis...@slingshot.co.nz wrote:

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 06:38:52AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
The two files are nearly identical and need them displayed 
simultaneously
for instant visual comparison. Opening one of the files read only 
would be

acceptable but not preferable.


apt-cache show diffutils

(perhaps there is no need for a desktop on a "minimum" install.) :)



On 03/16/2017 09:04 AM, I {the OP} had written:
>
> I don't need a diff tool exactly. I need to do a _visual_ comparison
> to make sure I'm editing the right portion.
> I might say I was looking for an "analog" not "digital" solution.






I recommend nedit.  I have used it for assembler programming for many years.

Best regards,
Fred

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Curt]

On 2017-04-01, cbannis...@slingshot.co.nz  wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 06:38:52AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
>> The two files are nearly identical and need them displayed simultaneously
>> for instant visual comparison. Opening one of the files read only would be
>> acceptable but not preferable.
>
> apt-cache show diffutils
>
> (perhaps there is no need for a desktop on a "minimum" install.) :)
>

What kind of files are these, anyway? vimdiff seems fine, but for word
differences (as between two literary texts, let's say) it's worthless
(although there may be a plugin or another way).


-- 
"It might be a vision--of a shell, of a wheelbarrow, of a fairy kingdom on the
far side of the hedge; or it might be the glory of speed; no one knew." --Mrs.
Ramsay, speculating on why her little daughter might be dashing about, in "To
the Lighthouse," by Virginia Woolf.

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Richard Owlett]

On 04/01/2017 10:55 AM, cbannis...@slingshot.co.nz wrote:

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 06:38:52AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:

The two files are nearly identical and need them displayed simultaneously
for instant visual comparison. Opening one of the files read only would be
acceptable but not preferable.


apt-cache show diffutils

(perhaps there is no need for a desktop on a "minimum" install.) :)



On 03/16/2017 09:04 AM, I {the OP} had written:
>
> I don't need a diff tool exactly. I need to do a _visual_ comparison
> to make sure I'm editing the right portion.
> I might say I was looking for an "analog" not "digital" solution.

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[cbannister]

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 06:38:52AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> The two files are nearly identical and need them displayed simultaneously
> for instant visual comparison. Opening one of the files read only would be
> acceptable but not preferable.

apt-cache show diffutils

(perhaps there is no need for a desktop on a "minimum" install.) :)

-- 
The media's the most powerful entity on earth. 
They have the power to make the innocent guilty 
and to make the guilty innocent, and that's power.
 -- Malcolm X

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[davidson]

On Fri, 17 Mar 2017, david...@freevolt.org wrote:


In case OP decides to install emacs, given his previously expressed
appreciation of fine documentation, I recommend installing also (for
the chosen version NN of emacs) the emacsNN-common-non-dfsg package
from the non-free repository.

This is the simplest way of installing the info pages for emacs.


Hrm. Installing XXX is the simplest way of installing XXX. Very
insightful.

The second instance of "installing" should probably have been
"obtaining".

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[davidson]

On Thu, 16 Mar 2017, John Hasler wrote:


Richard Owlett writes:

I require two things:
1. a search and replace which can include a "newline" in new string.
2. display/edit 2 files simultaneously *side by side*


Emacs.


In case OP decides to install emacs, given his previously expressed
appreciation of fine documentation, I recommend installing also (for
the chosen version NN of emacs) the emacsNN-common-non-dfsg package
from the non-free repository.

This is the simplest way of installing the info pages for emacs.

That they happen to reside in non-free is conceivably unexpected, so
it bears special mention.

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Gene Heskett]

On Friday 17 March 2017 10:26:05 Jonathan Dowland wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 07:37:11AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > I do, I am a very longtime user of amanda, since 1998 TBE.
>
> OK - I misread your post as suggesting you had lost 6 months of work.
>
> > And yet for me, "life" is long, I'm 82 and counting.
>
> No point wasting any of it, no matter how much you end up getting.

My point exactly. I've chased electrons to make them do useful work for  
close to 70 of those 82 years, so I can't wean me at this late stage. :)

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page 

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Jonathan Dowland]

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 07:37:11AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> I do, I am a very longtime user of amanda, since 1998 TBE.

OK - I misread your post as suggesting you had lost 6 months of work.

> And yet for me, "life" is long, I'm 82 and counting.

No point wasting any of it, no matter how much you end up getting.

-- 
Jonathan Dowland
Please do not CC me, I am subscribed to the list.


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Gene Heskett]

On Friday 17 March 2017 05:49:30 Jonathan Dowland wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 09:54:42AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > gedit has caused me to have to start over again, 3 times, on a 600+
> > line configuration file for machine control on several occasions. As
> > the file it trashed was 6 months worth of adding new features to
> > that machines control, that was not appreciated. 1st time is a wtf?,
> > 2nd time sends me a message, 3rd time I shut it down w/o the save
> > and never ran it again.
>
> Whilst this is very frustrating, one other thing it tells me is you
> need to set up a backup system (although you are quite right to
> abandon gedit based on your experiences)

I do, I am a very longtime user of amanda, since 1998 TBE. I've never 
contaminated my thinking with a windows install, going from a coco3 with 
nitros9, to amigados, to linux at RH-5.0. amanda does all 5 of these 
machines every night at about 1:20 AM and it got used all 3 times. The 
problem with that is that the status of the backup was 15 to 20 hours 
old, so I lost that days work and had to re-invent that particular batch 
of work.  I keep a rotating vtape setup of 30 days here, on a terabyte 
drive, and amanda can go back for recovery as much as 26 days if 
required. Since this is not a real tape setup where access needs to read 
the whole tape to get to the last block of data, but random access on 
rotating media, recovery's are as much as 100x faster than from tape. 
And so far its been 100% dependable, which is a heck of a lot better 
than losing 4 or 5 tapes a month, and a drive a year because I never had 
an affordable drive that didn't have to spend the thanksgiving to new 
years holidays in Oklahoma City being refurbished. Disk drives have been 
100x more dependable. That drive now has in excess of 62 thousand 
spinning hours on it, has had 25 reallocated sectors since the first 
time I looked at it with smartctl at about 5 thousand hours. It will 
die, but smartctl has so far given me enough notice that I can run up to 
Staples and get another drive and rsync to it, no data lost.

> > gedit is like asking if freshly poured concrete will crack.  Wrong
> > question because it will, the right question is "when", its just a
> > matter of time. Life is too short for putting up with that.
>
> I like this comparison :)

And yet for me, "life" is long, I'm 82 and counting.

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page 

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Jonathan Dowland]

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 09:54:42AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> gedit has caused me to have to start over again, 3 times, on a 600+ line 
> configuration file for machine control on several occasions. As the file 
> it trashed was 6 months worth of adding new features to that machines 
> control, that was not appreciated. 1st time is a wtf?, 2nd time sends me 
> a message, 3rd time I shut it down w/o the save and never ran it again.

Whilst this is very frustrating, one other thing it tells me is you need
to set up a backup system (although you are quite right to abandon gedit
based on your experiences)

> gedit is like asking if freshly poured concrete will crack.  Wrong 
> question because it will, the right question is "when", its just a 
> matter of time. Life is too short for putting up with that.

I like this comparison :)


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Ben Caradoc-Davies]

On 17/03/17 01:09, Celejar wrote:

I just checked, and Geany can do both.


I always use:

geany --new-instance

My ~/bin/geany is:

#!/bin/bash
exec /usr/bin/geany --new-instance "$@"

Kind regards,

--
Ben Caradoc-Davies 
Director
Transient Software Limited 
New Zealand

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Ben Caradoc-Davies]

On 17/03/17 02:56, Fred wrote:

I recommend Nedit.


Ah, rectangular cut and paste, how do I miss thee. I abandoned nedit for 
the allure of scalable fonts (in gedit then geany), but still remember 
it fondly.


Kind regards,

--
Ben Caradoc-Davies 
Director
Transient Software Limited 
New Zealand

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Joe]

On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 09:04:00 -0500
Richard Owlett  wrote:

> On 03/16/2017 07:20 AM, Joe wrote:
> > On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 06:38:52 -0500
> > Richard Owlett  wrote:
> >  

> >>
> >> The two files are nearly identical and need them displayed
> >> simultaneously for instant visual comparison. Opening one of the
> >> files read only would be acceptable but not preferable.
> >>  
> >
> > Yes, that does suggest a programming tool such as geany, or a
> > graphical file diff utility. I don't use one in Linux, but there
> > are several.
> > http://www.tecmint.com/best-linux-file-diff-tools-comparison/ 
> 
> I don't need a diff tool exactly. I need to do a _visual_ comparison 
> make sure I'm editing the right portion.
> I might say I was looking for an "analog" not "digital" solution.
> 

Nothing actually prevents you from looking at the screen while you have
the two files open. You are free to ignore the helpful highlighting...

That's why I explicitly said 'graphical', I can see that a command-line
diff is no use here, but if you want to mess around with
near-identical text files, a GUI diff program will give you the
maximum possible help.

-- 
Joe

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[rhkramer]

On Thursday, March 16, 2017 10:15:06 AM Christian Groessler wrote:
> On 03/16/17 15:01, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Well, I did, and I didn't ;-)  That was on the order of 15 years ago.
> > Problems that I can remember centered around fonts, font sizes,
> > readability, and compatibility with my past experiences (which, by that
> > time in my life, were mostly Dos / Window editors--in particular, I
> > loved (I think the name was qedit--if there is a qedit now on Linux, I
> > think it is something different than I remember).
> > 
> > And, indeed, I might be misremembering the name.  It was a shareware
> > editor, and one of the few shareware programs I kept using (and paid
> > for).
> 
> I'm remembering qedit (just "q" on the command line). It was a nice,
> clean, and fast, DOS editor.

Chris, 

Ahh, yes, thanks--that was it!

> I was using BRIEF under DOS back then for programming, but for quick
> edits I was using q.

I encountered BRIEF, but, iirc, it was not free, and a little expensive for my 
tastes at the time.

> It's successor is the "semware editor", but sadly, just for Windows.

Well, very rarely I do touch Windows, but--well, vaguely--I think I've heard 
of semware (and /or the semware editor).  Each time I (have to) touch Windows, 
I hope it is the last ;-)

regards,
Randy Kramer

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[John Hasler]

rhkramer writes (about Emacs):
> That was on the order of 15 years ago.  Problems that I can remember
> centered around fonts, font sizes, readability...

None of those would be problems now.
-- 
John Hasler 
jhas...@newsguy.com
Elmwood, WI USA

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Christian Groessler]

On 03/16/17 15:01, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:

Well, I did, and I didn't ;-)  That was on the order of 15 years ago.
Problems that I can remember centered around fonts, font sizes, readability,
and compatibility with my past experiences (which, by that time in my life,
were mostly Dos / Window editors--in particular, I loved (I think the name was
qedit--if there is a qedit now on Linux, I think it is something different than
I remember).

And, indeed, I might be misremembering the name.  It was a shareware editor,
and one of the few shareware programs I kept using (and paid for).



I'm remembering qedit (just "q" on the command line). It was a nice, 
clean, and fast, DOS editor.
I was using BRIEF under DOS back then for programming, but for quick 
edits I was using q.


It's successor is the "semware editor", but sadly, just for Windows.


regards,
chris

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Charlie Kravetz]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 06:38:52 -0500
Richard Owlett  wrote:

>My environment is Jessie (8.6.0) with MATE desktop.
>I require two things:
>  1. a search and replace which can include a "newline" in new string.
>  2. display/edit 2 files simultaneously *side by side*
>
>MATE's standard editor (Pluma) can handle the first easily.
>
>I see no way to open 2 instances of Pluma in separate windows - a la 
>Notepad in WindowsXP. Pluma will only open multiple files in multiple tabs.
>
>The two files are nearly identical and need them displayed 
>simultaneously for instant visual comparison. Opening one of the files 
>read only would be acceptable but not preferable.
>
>Suggestions?
>TIA
>
>

Medit does this with out adding tons of other files. It can be fully
customized when wanted, yet does not need to run in a big window.

- -- 
Charlie Kravetz
Linux Registered User Number 425914
[http://linuxcounter.net/user/425914.html]
Never let anyone steal your DREAM.   [http://keepingdreams.com]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-

iQEyBAEBCAAdFiEEG5QK93YKrQMH22ZTiq6LjqbJ0IAFAljKmMwACgkQiq6LjqbJ
0IBjZAf4pzevXjUQVwJlO7OLU8qbiqRbI3MasCBrF6oMzo6XY/RKNFTpWod6m67s
y0Vxo+uz53Sawe2HXGzMRymLuH++JPrwj185nIgo+RsXt0XdKCt3s2LCi353bKkC
zVRZ9xIvRxZZSqdrqGkfZiCaDr/SjO5ZoCEkOWF6FewPiUXcgWEiJg6gWcIyDn/r
be0oWgTsb4ojZ2yqyNgCjvvqiP2J7P3sfcw91v1YHo+15/hJ8bhKiV5x8p7hpk1O
MiDrh90Tra4CMZENJpNUaA/SS3tmbuD7ptW51jDA9wOkHCMBqfB45FrWQGz3zg8W
rB4SwjrulRhm6nyABlR2V+9x6P7k
=Jmt3
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Andreas Ronnquist]

On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 08:56:12 -0500,
Richard Owlett wrote:

>On 03/16/2017 07:27 AM, Andreas Ronnquist wrote:
>> On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 13:16:19 +0100,
>> Andreas Ronnquist wrote:
>>  
>>> On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 06:38:52 -0500,
>>> Richard Owlett wrote:
>>>  
 My environment is Jessie (8.6.0) with MATE desktop.
 I require two things:
  1. a search and replace which can include a "newline" in new
 string. 2. display/edit 2 files simultaneously *side by side*

 MATE's standard editor (Pluma) can handle the first easily.

 I see no way to open 2 instances of Pluma in separate windows - a
 la Notepad in WindowsXP. Pluma will only open multiple files in
 multiple tabs.

 The two files are nearly identical and need them displayed
 simultaneously for instant visual comparison. Opening one of the
 files read only would be acceptable but not preferable.
  
>>>
>>> You are looking for the --new-window option, from the terminal:
>>>
>>> pluma file1.txt &
>>> pluma --new-window file2.txt &
>>>  
>
>That's a neat solution.
>What should I have read that I obviously didn't?

pluma --help

-- Andreas Rönnquist
mailingli...@gusnan.se
gus...@openmailbox.org

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Fred]

On 03/16/2017 04:38 AM, Richard Owlett wrote:

My environment is Jessie (8.6.0) with MATE desktop.
I require two things:
 1. a search and replace which can include a "newline" in new string.
 2. display/edit 2 files simultaneously *side by side*

MATE's standard editor (Pluma) can handle the first easily.

I see no way to open 2 instances of Pluma in separate windows - a la 
Notepad in WindowsXP. Pluma will only open multiple files in multiple 
tabs.


The two files are nearly identical and need them displayed 
simultaneously for instant visual comparison. Opening one of the files 
read only would be acceptable but not preferable.


Suggestions?
TIA




I recommend Nedit.
Best regards,
Fred

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[rhkramer]

On Thursday, March 16, 2017 09:47:31 AM to...@tuxteam.de wrote:

> Your hunch isn't completely wrong. From Emac's wikipedia page:
> 
> The original EMACS was written in 1976 by David A. Moon and
> Guy L. Steele, Jr. as a set of Editor MACroS for the TECO
> editor. It was inspired by the ideas of the TECO-macro editors
> TECMAC and TMACS.
> 
> The most popular, and most ported, version of Emacs is GNU Emacs,
> which was created by Richard Stallman for the GNU Project.
> XEmacs is a variant that branched from GNU Emacs in 1991. Both
> GNU Emacs and XEmacs use Emacs Lisp and are for the most part
> compatible with each other.

Interesting!

> Of course, when I say affectionately "Emacs" here, I'm thinking of
> GNU Emacs. And it has evolved... a bit since then.
> 
> (And, BTW. you could do much worse than having Stefan around here ;-)
> 
> Try it. You'll be overwhelmed. But you'll like it, promised.

Must be my day to write to lists...

Well, I did, and I didn't ;-)  That was on the order of 15 years ago.  
Problems that I can remember centered around fonts, font sizes, readability, 
and compatibility with my past experiences (which, by that time in my life, 
were mostly Dos / Window editors--in particular, I loved (I think the name was 
qedit--if there is a qedit now on Linux, I think it is something different than 
I remember).

And, indeed, I might be misremembering the name.  It was a shareware editor, 
and one of the few shareware programs I kept using (and paid for).

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Richard Owlett]

On 03/16/2017 07:20 AM, Joe wrote:

On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 06:38:52 -0500
Richard Owlett  wrote:


My environment is Jessie (8.6.0) with MATE desktop.
I require two things:
  1. a search and replace which can include a "newline" in new string.
  2. display/edit 2 files simultaneously *side by side*

MATE's standard editor (Pluma) can handle the first easily.

I see no way to open 2 instances of Pluma in separate windows - a la
Notepad in WindowsXP. Pluma will only open multiple files in multiple
tabs.


So will gedit, but have you tried right-clicking and seeing if you get
'open in another window' as gedit does?


The version I have does not, but evidently the latest does.



The two files are nearly identical and need them displayed
simultaneously for instant visual comparison. Opening one of the
files read only would be acceptable but not preferable.



Yes, that does suggest a programming tool such as geany, or a graphical
file diff utility. I don't use one in Linux, but there are several.
http://www.tecmint.com/best-linux-file-diff-tools-comparison/



I don't need a diff tool exactly. I need to do a _visual_ comparison 
make sure I'm editing the right portion.

I might say I was looking for an "analog" not "digital" solution.

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Richard Owlett]

On 03/16/2017 07:27 AM, Andreas Ronnquist wrote:

On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 13:16:19 +0100,
Andreas Ronnquist wrote:


On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 06:38:52 -0500,
Richard Owlett wrote:


My environment is Jessie (8.6.0) with MATE desktop.
I require two things:
 1. a search and replace which can include a "newline" in new string.
 2. display/edit 2 files simultaneously *side by side*

MATE's standard editor (Pluma) can handle the first easily.

I see no way to open 2 instances of Pluma in separate windows - a la
Notepad in WindowsXP. Pluma will only open multiple files in multiple
tabs.

The two files are nearly identical and need them displayed
simultaneously for instant visual comparison. Opening one of the files
read only would be acceptable but not preferable.



You are looking for the --new-window option, from the terminal:

pluma file1.txt &
pluma --new-window file2.txt &



That's a neat solution.
What should I have read that I obviously didn't?



And there is a menu option when right-clicking a tab (if there is
more than one tab open in Pluma) - "Move to New Window"

(Both these options are on Pluma 1.16.0, from unstable - the
functionality might not be available in older versions).



It's not available in Pluma 1.8.1 but your first suggestion works nicely.
Thanks

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Gene Heskett]

On Thursday 16 March 2017 08:09:13 Celejar wrote:

> On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 06:38:52 -0500
>
> Richard Owlett  wrote:
> > My environment is Jessie (8.6.0) with MATE desktop.
> > I require two things:
> >   1. a search and replace which can include a "newline" in new
> > string. 2. display/edit 2 files simultaneously *side by side*
> >
> > MATE's standard editor (Pluma) can handle the first easily.
> >
> > I see no way to open 2 instances of Pluma in separate windows - a la
> > Notepad in WindowsXP. Pluma will only open multiple files in
> > multiple tabs.
> >
> > The two files are nearly identical and need them displayed
> > simultaneously for instant visual comparison. Opening one of the
> > files read only would be acceptable but not preferable.
>
> I just checked, and Geany can do both. [Probably lots of others can,
> too, but this is what I have installed and have been using lately.]
>
> Celejar

geany has the added advantage of never trashing your file on the save.

gedit has caused me to have to start over again, 3 times, on a 600+ line 
configuration file for machine control on several occasions. As the file 
it trashed was 6 months worth of adding new features to that machines 
control, that was not appreciated. 1st time is a wtf?, 2nd time sends me 
a message, 3rd time I shut it down w/o the save and never ran it again.

geany may look like gedit,but it sure doesn't screw things up,  moving 
whole pages of code from page 23 to page 7 (and vice versa) and other 
such "helpfull" niceties like gedit does.  Purge that gedit crap and all 
its plugins from your system and save yourself from potential headaches 
that Excedrin has not yet assigned a number to.

gedit is like asking if freshly poured concrete will crack.  Wrong 
question because it will, the right question is "when", its just a 
matter of time. Life is too short for putting up with that.

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page 

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[tomas]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 08:33:46AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> On 03/16/2017 07:13 AM, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> >
> >>Suggestions?
> >
> >That said, it takes some investment. Some would say it's a
> >religion, but there are especially perverse polyreligious
> >folks out there: I "am" Vim *and* Emacs (take that ;-)
> >
> 
> I'll see your "Vim *and* Emacs" and raise you TECO.
> Not sure if it's available for Linux, haven't seen it in ~40 years
> since I left DEC. It could do everything but cook and clean house.

Your hunch isn't completely wrong. From Emac's wikipedia page:

The original EMACS was written in 1976 by David A. Moon and
Guy L. Steele, Jr. as a set of Editor MACroS for the TECO
editor. It was inspired by the ideas of the TECO-macro editors
TECMAC and TMACS.

The most popular, and most ported, version of Emacs is GNU Emacs,
which was created by Richard Stallman for the GNU Project.
XEmacs is a variant that branched from GNU Emacs in 1991. Both
GNU Emacs and XEmacs use Emacs Lisp and are for the most part
compatible with each other.

Of course, when I say affectionately "Emacs" here, I'm thinking of
GNU Emacs. And it has evolved... a bit since then.

(And, BTW. you could do much worse than having Stefan around here ;-)

Try it. You'll be overwhelmed. But you'll like it, promised.

Regards
- -- tomás
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAljKl3MACgkQBcgs9XrR2kbS9wCfXLpNrgwoJVNdsJswQTfZHCYC
dSUAnRiH5m8FcHQM3KTMlwsV4ARuz6t2
=awir
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Stefan Monnier]

>  1. a search and replace which can include a "newline" in new string.
>  2. display/edit 2 files simultaneously *side by side*

Really?
I find it hard to believe that there could be editors out there which
don't satisfy both of those.

Of course, I'd recommend Emacs, but really: *any* editor should do (even
in version 0.01).


Stefan

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Richard Owlett]

On 03/16/2017 07:13 AM, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:



Suggestions?


That said, it takes some investment. Some would say it's a
religion, but there are especially perverse polyreligious
folks out there: I "am" Vim *and* Emacs (take that ;-)



I'll see your "Vim *and* Emacs" and raise you TECO.
Not sure if it's available for Linux, haven't seen it in ~40 years since 
I left DEC. It could do everything but cook and clean house.

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Richard Owlett]

On 03/16/2017 07:09 AM, Lisi Reisz wrote:

On Thursday 16 March 2017 11:38:52 Richard Owlett wrote:

My environment is Jessie (8.6.0) with MATE desktop.
I require two things:
  1. a search and replace which can include a "newline" in new string.
  2. display/edit 2 files simultaneously *side by side*

MATE's standard editor (Pluma) can handle the first easily.

I see no way to open 2 instances of Pluma in separate windows - a la
Notepad in WindowsXP. Pluma will only open multiple files in multiple tabs.

The two files are nearly identical and need them displayed
simultaneously for instant visual comparison. Opening one of the files
read only would be acceptable but not preferable.

Suggestions?
TIA


I can't try with Pluma, because I haven't got it.  But I just tried with
KWrite-Trinity without the slightest problem.  I can't think how to control
the tome in which this comes out in an email, but along the lines of "Is t
plugged in?", have you actually tried to do it?


YEPP 
I was the failure which prompted my post.
Geany, as suggested, solves my current problem without adding large 
portions of another DE.





I just managed to find a failure!  KEdit-Trinity again will open two windows
without a problem, but Kate-Trinity appears not to do so.  I wanted to try
GEdit, but I haven't got it and am disinclined to install half Gnome, on a
system which is wavering, just to try this.  Sorry, Richard.

But it is obvious that some editors will do this.  You just have to find one
you are prepared to install that does it.  Kwrite-Trinity and KEdit-Trinity
can both do it.

Lisi

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Richard Owlett]

On 03/16/2017 07:09 AM, Celejar wrote:

On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 06:38:52 -0500
Richard Owlett  wrote:


My environment is Jessie (8.6.0) with MATE desktop.
I require two things:
  1. a search and replace which can include a "newline" in new string.
  2. display/edit 2 files simultaneously *side by side*

MATE's standard editor (Pluma) can handle the first easily.

I see no way to open 2 instances of Pluma in separate windows - a la
Notepad in WindowsXP. Pluma will only open multiple files in multiple tabs.

The two files are nearly identical and need them displayed
simultaneously for instant visual comparison. Opening one of the files
read only would be acceptable but not preferable.


I just checked, and Geany can do both. [Probably lots of others can,
too, but this is what I have installed and have been using lately.]



Turns out there is a FAQ for that
http://www.geany.org/Documentation/FAQ#QQuestions2

Out of the box it will allow multiple instances to  be launched - that 
will be adequate for me.


The FAQ indicates a plug-in is available to allow displaying multiple 
files side by side. Will investigate later. Have installed Geany and it 
will get me out of my current problem.

Thanks

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[John Hasler]

tomas writes:
> That said, it takes some investment. Some would say it's a religion,
> but there are especially perverse polyreligious folks out there: I
> "am" Vim *and* Emacs (take that ;-)

You are not the only one.
-- 
John Hasler 
jhas...@newsguy.com
Elmwood, WI USA

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[John Hasler]

Richard Owlett writes:
> I require two things:
> 1. a search and replace which can include a "newline" in new string.
> 2. display/edit 2 files simultaneously *side by side*

Emacs.
-- 
John Hasler 
jhas...@newsguy.com
Elmwood, WI USA

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Andreas Ronnquist]

On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 13:16:19 +0100,
Andreas Ronnquist wrote:

>On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 06:38:52 -0500,
>Richard Owlett wrote:
>
>>My environment is Jessie (8.6.0) with MATE desktop.
>>I require two things:
>>  1. a search and replace which can include a "newline" in new string.
>>  2. display/edit 2 files simultaneously *side by side*
>>
>>MATE's standard editor (Pluma) can handle the first easily.
>>
>>I see no way to open 2 instances of Pluma in separate windows - a la
>>Notepad in WindowsXP. Pluma will only open multiple files in multiple
>>tabs.
>>
>>The two files are nearly identical and need them displayed
>>simultaneously for instant visual comparison. Opening one of the files
>>read only would be acceptable but not preferable.
>>  
>
>You are looking for the --new-window option, from the terminal:
>
>pluma file1.txt &
>pluma --new-window file2.txt &
>

And there is a menu option when right-clicking a tab (if there is
more than one tab open in Pluma) - "Move to New Window"

(Both these options are on Pluma 1.16.0, from unstable - the
functionality might not be available in older versions).

-- Andreas Rönnquist
mailingli...@gusnan.se
gus...@openmailbox.org

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Joe]

On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 06:38:52 -0500
Richard Owlett  wrote:

> My environment is Jessie (8.6.0) with MATE desktop.
> I require two things:
>   1. a search and replace which can include a "newline" in new string.
>   2. display/edit 2 files simultaneously *side by side*
> 
> MATE's standard editor (Pluma) can handle the first easily.
> 
> I see no way to open 2 instances of Pluma in separate windows - a la 
> Notepad in WindowsXP. Pluma will only open multiple files in multiple
> tabs.

So will gedit, but have you tried right-clicking and seeing if you get
'open in another window' as gedit does?
> 
> The two files are nearly identical and need them displayed 
> simultaneously for instant visual comparison. Opening one of the
> files read only would be acceptable but not preferable.
> 

Yes, that does suggest a programming tool such as geany, or a graphical
file diff utility. I don't use one in Linux, but there are several.
http://www.tecmint.com/best-linux-file-diff-tools-comparison/

-- 
Joe

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Andreas Ronnquist]

On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 06:38:52 -0500,
Richard Owlett wrote:

>My environment is Jessie (8.6.0) with MATE desktop.
>I require two things:
>  1. a search and replace which can include a "newline" in new string.
>  2. display/edit 2 files simultaneously *side by side*
>
>MATE's standard editor (Pluma) can handle the first easily.
>
>I see no way to open 2 instances of Pluma in separate windows - a la
>Notepad in WindowsXP. Pluma will only open multiple files in multiple
>tabs.
>
>The two files are nearly identical and need them displayed
>simultaneously for instant visual comparison. Opening one of the files
>read only would be acceptable but not preferable.
>

You are looking for the --new-window option, from the terminal:

pluma file1.txt &
pluma --new-window file2.txt &

-- Andreas Rönnquist
mailingli...@gusnan.se
gus...@openmailbox.org

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[tomas]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 06:38:52AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> My environment is Jessie (8.6.0) with MATE desktop.
> I require two things:
>  1. a search and replace which can include a "newline" in new string.
>  2. display/edit 2 files simultaneously *side by side*
> 
> MATE's standard editor (Pluma) can handle the first easily.
> 
> I see no way to open 2 instances of Pluma in separate windows - a la
> Notepad in WindowsXP. Pluma will only open multiple files in
> multiple tabs.
> 
> The two files are nearly identical and need them displayed
> simultaneously for instant visual comparison. Opening one of the
> files read only would be acceptable but not preferable.

This nearly sounds like a description of Emacs' ediff mode.

That said, Emacs is sufficiently different from the text editors
around that tackling it amounts to taking a respectable hill.

The view from up there, though, is breathtaking.

Some tricks in the rough context of system administration:

 - transparent editing of files on other hosts, given only
   one of ssh/sftp/ftp access (tramp).
 - mixed marked-up text (à la Markdown) and code snippets,
   inserting the "result" of evaluating those code snippets
   in the text (code == C, Python, Perl, shells, R, many
   more), results can be text or images, for documenting
   (up to literary programming)
 - useful exploration of lots of files. The idiom of
   "find . -type f -name *blah -exec grep foo {} +"
   from your editor, with clickable links to the found
   lines
 - hex editor, psychotherapist, towers of Hanoi ;-)

> Suggestions?

That said, it takes some investment. Some would say it's a
religion, but there are especially perverse polyreligious
folks out there: I "am" Vim *and* Emacs (take that ;-)

regards
- -- tomás
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAljKgVcACgkQBcgs9XrR2kYjkgCdGos4ETw/d/wbjamy/7/vDUjY
GtAAmgJliKRpwYucxh7iRBroqaQMlsWJ
=3e/X
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Lisi Reisz]

On Thursday 16 March 2017 11:38:52 Richard Owlett wrote:
> My environment is Jessie (8.6.0) with MATE desktop.
> I require two things:
>   1. a search and replace which can include a "newline" in new string.
>   2. display/edit 2 files simultaneously *side by side*
>
> MATE's standard editor (Pluma) can handle the first easily.
>
> I see no way to open 2 instances of Pluma in separate windows - a la
> Notepad in WindowsXP. Pluma will only open multiple files in multiple tabs.
>
> The two files are nearly identical and need them displayed
> simultaneously for instant visual comparison. Opening one of the files
> read only would be acceptable but not preferable.
>
> Suggestions?
> TIA

I can't try with Pluma, because I haven't got it.  But I just tried with 
KWrite-Trinity without the slightest problem.  I can't think how to control 
the tome in which this comes out in an email, but along the lines of "Is t 
plugged in?", have you actually tried to do it?

I just managed to find a failure!  KEdit-Trinity again will open two windows 
without a problem, but Kate-Trinity appears not to do so.  I wanted to try 
GEdit, but I haven't got it and am disinclined to install half Gnome, on a 
system which is wavering, just to try this.  Sorry, Richard.

But it is obvious that some editors will do this.  You just have to find one 
you are prepared to install that does it.  Kwrite-Trinity and KEdit-Trinity 
can both do it.

Lisi

Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

[Celejar]

On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 06:38:52 -0500
Richard Owlett  wrote:

> My environment is Jessie (8.6.0) with MATE desktop.
> I require two things:
>   1. a search and replace which can include a "newline" in new string.
>   2. display/edit 2 files simultaneously *side by side*
> 
> MATE's standard editor (Pluma) can handle the first easily.
> 
> I see no way to open 2 instances of Pluma in separate windows - a la 
> Notepad in WindowsXP. Pluma will only open multiple files in multiple tabs.
> 
> The two files are nearly identical and need them displayed 
> simultaneously for instant visual comparison. Opening one of the files 
> read only would be acceptable but not preferable.

I just checked, and Geany can do both. [Probably lots of others can,
too, but this is what I have installed and have been using lately.]

Celejar