John == John Griffiths [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
John Hmmm, just wrote a 1,600 article in emacs via ssh.
John I'm not using all the navigation aids very well yet but i
John can see where I'm going from here.
Heh, hehI can just see you discovering emacsclient, and then
On 02 Apr 2003, Joey Hess wrote:
John Griffiths wrote:
what I'm after is a recommendation from others who might have used
something like this to write 5,000 word plus english language documents.
I've had no problems writing documents in that range with vim. Folding
becomes fairly useful
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 09:54:21PM -0600, Shyamal Prasad wrote:
John == John Griffiths [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
John Travis Crump wrote:
Is this a troll? I prefer vim, a good number of people prefer
emacs. Both will suit your needs.
John No, not a
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 11:49:45PM -0700, Glenn English wrote:
On Wed, 2003-04-02 at 19:23, Mark Ferlatte wrote:
Honestly, I don't know that there is a good console wordpad.exe like editor.
nano is probably the closest to what you are looking for, with emacs being a
(much more complex but
Colin == Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Colin On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 09:54:21PM -0600, Shyamal Prasad
Colin wrote:
The quoting above, [...] were all done by emacs.
Colin Yes, I can tell. :( I even have a special vim macro to get
Colin rid of that damned
John Griffiths [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
what I'm after is a recommendation from others who might have used
something like this to write 5,000 word plus english language documents.
Neal Stephenson uses Emacs:
http://hobbes.ncsa.uiuc.edu/nealstephensonOS.html
--
Alan Shutko [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Colin Watson wrote:
Pico?
I don't know of any good reason to use pico instead of the suggested
nano, unless you're using pine and are only using pico as the built-in
editor. As far as I know nano entirely supersedes pico in all other
respects.
And best of all nano is free software while
Colin Watson wrote:
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 09:54:21PM -0600, Shyamal Prasad wrote:
John No, not a troll, I want to know if any of the editors are
John aimed at writers rather than coders,
The quoting above, [...] were all done by emacs.
Yes, I can tell. :( I even have a special
On Thu, 3 Apr 2003 11:19:52 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Proulx) wrote:
And best of all nano is free software while pico/pine fails the DFSG
test.
Wasn't that how nano came about? A free replacement for a non-free but popular editor?
Kevin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 11:18:48AM -0700, Bob Proulx wrote:
Colin Watson wrote:
Yes, I can tell. :( I even have a special vim macro to get rid of that
damned emacs-style (SuperCite/PowerQuote) quoting, as it goes nuts once
you're a few levels deep ...
Note that I use emacs as well. But
On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 05:49:19PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 3 Apr 2003 11:19:52 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Proulx) wrote:
And best of all nano is free software while pico/pine fails the DFSG
test.
Wasn't that how nano came about? A free replacement for a non-free but
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Thanks to everyone who contributed.
Emacs seems to have a very similar control structure to the ancient
perfect writer on my fathers old kaypro, so i'll give it a shot as a
happy return to my childhood.
(BTW the tutorial sold it to me along with
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hmmm,
just wrote a 1,600 article in emacs via ssh.
I'm not using all the navigation aids very well yet but i can see where
I'm going from here.
I really liked the ispell interface.
Thanks very much for all the suggestions.
John
John Griffiths
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
G'day all.
Due to a somewhat complicated set of circumstances I'm looking for a
decent non graphical shell based text editor to write prose with.
- - basically i want to be able to ssh onto my server and write from a
number of remote locations.
I
-- John Griffiths [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
(on Thursday, 03 April 2003, 10:58 AM +1000):
Due to a somewhat complicated set of circumstances I'm looking for a
decent non graphical shell based text editor to write prose with.
- - basically i want to be able to ssh onto my server and write from a
John == John Griffiths [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
John G'day all. Due to a somewhat complicated set of
John circumstances I'm looking for a decent non graphical shell
John based text editor to write prose with.
John basically i want to be able to ssh onto my server and write
John Griffiths wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
G'day all.
Due to a somewhat complicated set of circumstances I'm looking for a
decent non graphical shell based text editor to write prose with.
- - basically i want to be able to ssh onto my server and write from a
number of
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Roberto Sanchez wrote:
vim also has some neat search features, syntax highlighting (if your
prose happens to be C, Lisp, or some other code), online help, and a
bunch of others.
Thanks for that, I should clarify that the language I want to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote:
vim, emacs, pico, nano, ... these are all text editors. How you format
your text is up to you. (This was written in vim.)
Yep, OK.
what I'm after is a recommendation from others who might have used
something like
--
-Original Message-
From: John Griffiths [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, 3 April 2003 11:51 AM
To: Roberto Sanchez; debian users
Subject: Re: Shell based text editor for writing prose
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Roberto Sanchez wrote
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Travis Crump wrote:
Is this a troll? I prefer vim, a good number of people prefer emacs.
Both will suit your needs.
No, not a troll, I want to know if any of the editors are aimed at
writers rather than coders,
maybe they aren't, maybe the
John Griffiths said on Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 11:32:37AM +1000:
vim also has some neat search features, syntax highlighting (if your
prose happens to be C, Lisp, or some other code), online help, and a
bunch of others.
Thanks for that, I should clarify that the language I want to write in
* John Griffiths [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003-04-03 13:09]:
what I'm after is a recommendation from others who might have used
something like this to write 5,000 word plus english language documents.
I've written a couple of 50,000 word novels, a 10,000 word Honours
thesis, and numerous short
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Thanks very much.
Tom Massey wrote:
* John Griffiths [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003-04-03 13:09]:
what I'm after is a recommendation from others who might have used
something like this to write 5,000 word plus english language documents.
I've written
nchez wrote:
vim also has some neat search features, syntax highlighting (if your
prose happens to be C, Lisp, or some other code), online help, and a
bunch of others.
Thanks for that, I should clarify that the language I want to write in
is english (ok, australian english - close) and i
On Wednesday 02 April 2003 10:23 pm, Tom Massey wrote:
* John Griffiths [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003-04-03 13:09]:
what I'm after is a recommendation from others who might have used
something like this to write 5,000 word plus english language
documents.
I've written a couple of 50,000 word
On Wed, 2003-04-02 at 20:32, John Griffiths wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Roberto Sanchez wrote:
vim also has some neat search features, syntax highlighting (if your
prose happens to be C, Lisp, or some other code), online help, and a
bunch of others.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Eric G. Miller wrote:
IMHO, it is better to write in plain text, focusing on *content* first,
and worry about *presentation* much, much later. I've seen people waste
enormous amounts of time formatting draft word processor documents over
and over
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Roberto Sanchez wrote:
vim also has some neat search features, syntax highlighting (if your
prose happens to be C, Lisp, or some other code), online help, and a
bunch of others.
Thanks for that, I should clarify that the language I want to
John == John Griffiths [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
John Travis Crump wrote:
Is this a troll? I prefer vim, a good number of people prefer
emacs. Both will suit your needs.
John No, not a troll, I want to know if any of the editors are
John aimed at writers
Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote:
vim, emacs, pico, nano, ... these are all text editors. How you format
your text is up to you. (This was written in vim.)
Yep, OK.
what I'm after is a recommendation from others who might have used
something like this to write 5,000 word plus english
Hal Vaughan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I've never looked at Emacs (actually I have, but the guide I was looking
at was rather poor). Is it easy to re-program control keys?
Yes (albeit in Lisp); my .emacs file has, for example
(global-set-key \C-xf 'fixup-whitespace)
to change what happens
John Griffiths wrote:
what I'm after is a recommendation from others who might have used
something like this to write 5,000 word plus english language documents.
I've had no problems writing documents in that range with vim. Folding
becomes fairly useful after a while, if it's all in one file.
On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 12:02 +1000, Joyce, Matthew wrote:
I tried many editors, I found them all crap.
What I wanted was a port of Edit which came with MSDos6. Alas there is non.
I did try using RHIDE, a programming IDE, for a while, ok as a text editor.
These days I just use Touch to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Michael Waters wrote:
If you haven't already tried it, you might like fte/sfte.
Michael
cool, it looks feature rich, what do you like about it?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -
On Wed, 2003-04-02 at 19:23, Mark Ferlatte wrote:
Honestly, I don't know that there is a good console wordpad.exe like editor.
nano is probably the closest to what you are looking for, with emacs being a
(much more complex but featureful) second.
Pico?
--
Glenn English
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
36 matches
Mail list logo
