1. Advertising
    y u no do it?

    Advertising (learn more)

    Advertise virtually anything here, with CPM banner ads, CPM email ads and CPC contextual links. You can target relevant areas of the site and show ads based on geographical location of the user if you wish.

    Starts at just $1 per CPM or $0.10 per CPC.

Which program do you use for HTML? Notepad++ vs?

Discussion in 'HTML & Website Design' started by formicin, Sep 12, 2012.

  1. kk5st

    kk5st Prominent Member

    Messages:
    3,478
    Likes Received:
    363
    Best Answers:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    335
    #41
    A much more useful answer. If you had read the post immediately before your first, or prior to that, my discussion on my own editor requirements, you would have understood my comment.
    SEMrush
    gary
     
    kk5st, Aug 15, 2015 IP
    SEMrush
  2. cronik

    cronik Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    718
    Likes Received:
    45
    Best Answers:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    180
    #42
    In Windows I use Notepad++, but since I switched over to Manjaro Linux I am using Brackets and Mousepad. It's all personal preference, but I really like Brackets now and I never liked it when I used Windows. I guess I really liked Notepad++ lol that's the perfect text editor IMO.
     
    cronik, Aug 15, 2015 IP
  3. Lalit Goyal

    Lalit Goyal Greenhorn

    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    21
    #43
    You are right @kk5st
    We should explain that why our choice is good. Well.. let me explain some reasons that why I love Netbeans.
    1) Auto-Suggest: If you will create any project in it, it will suggest you functions, class, methods, constants etc as soon as you type. Even if they are in the included files.
    2) Less memory consumption: It consume less memory than eclipse.
    3) File History: It automatically create a history of files like versioning.
    4) Fast serching: You can search for any text in the files of your projects and its very fast.
    5) Support for few very famous frameworks: It does support few of very famous frameworks like CakePHP, Symfony, Zend etc
    There are many more... :)

    Thanks !
     
    Lalit Goyal, Aug 17, 2015 IP
  4. kk5st

    kk5st Prominent Member

    Messages:
    3,478
    Likes Received:
    363
    Best Answers:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    335
    #44
    @Lalit Goyal
    Good, I learned something about Netbeans. Thanks

    gary
     
    kk5st, Aug 17, 2015 IP
  5. Keith Lock

    Keith Lock Greenhorn

    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    11
    #45
    I love TextPad, but also use editpad.org as a web based option. Back in the day I used Notepad!
     
    Keith Lock, Aug 18, 2015 IP
  6. PoPSiCLe

    PoPSiCLe Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    4,630
    Likes Received:
    724
    Best Answers:
    152
    Trophy Points:
    470
    #46
    Personally, I like Sublime for Windows. It's feature rich, and its packet-repository makes it easy to install plugins and update them as needed. Bare-bones, it provides a very decent editor, and if you need to, you can add basic plugins like ready-made color-coding for specific formats, or the ability to integrate with Git, or automatically build on save if you need that... it of course also do all the regular stuff, like search through a project (well, you can set a search-criteria based on folder, so if you chose the root folder of the project, it'll show you all instances matching that search). It uses tabs for files, which some may find annoying, personally I think it's just fine - I'm rarely able to type into more than one file at the time anyway ;)
    I used to use Notepad++, which is also a very good editor, but it never really worked as well as I wanted it to. Maybe I just didn't pay enough attention to the settings.
     
    PoPSiCLe, Aug 21, 2015 IP
  7. tribiq

    tribiq Peon

    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    #47
    thanks friends
    very interesting, Thanks
     
    tribiq, Aug 21, 2015 IP
  8. kk5st

    kk5st Prominent Member

    Messages:
    3,478
    Likes Received:
    363
    Best Answers:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    335
    #48
    @PoPSiCLe, I had forgotten the compile feature. I will excuse the omission by saying that I haven't written a compiled language in years. I don't care for build-on-save, as the majority of my (editing/working) saves would have led to broken builds. I did compile from within Emacs, but did it explicitly. Speaking of programming, I find the narrow feature helpful, narrow-to-defun/page/region/block/element, not to mention for html, css, or text articles. In case you know it by another name, narrow restricts focus and visibility to the area of interest. In my scatter-mindedness, I often managed to edit the wrong function/procedure/class/method, so narrow has likely saved my bacon a time or three.

    Do try tiling again. I find it helpful to have files open side by side containing notes and reminders, php or javascript code snippets, a calendar and/or a diary/day-date planner, files I am referring to, &c.

    gary
     
    kk5st, Aug 21, 2015 IP
  9. PoPSiCLe

    PoPSiCLe Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    4,630
    Likes Received:
    724
    Best Answers:
    152
    Trophy Points:
    470
    #49
    Ah, yes, I usually just use the build-on-save function for SASS (saves a bit of back-and-forth compiling the CSS, and saves me from having a compiler running on the server in real-time).
    While I do get the point of having multiple content up, I have three screens (or four/five if I count laptop and/or iPad), so I don't mind having a separate notepad up on a second screen. I dunno, I don't really feel the need to have multiple docs open at the same time, it takes me about a second to switch between the correct files via the keyboard anyway :)
    I don't use the focus / narrow functionality that much, but it is good to have sometimes :)
     
    PoPSiCLe, Aug 22, 2015 IP
  10. jazmyn

    jazmyn Member

    Messages:
    67
    Likes Received:
    1
    Best Answers:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    #50
    I use Dreamweaver
     
    jazmyn, Aug 22, 2015 IP
  11. deathshadow

    deathshadow Acclaimed Member

    Messages:
    8,976
    Likes Received:
    1,635
    Best Answers:
    233
    Trophy Points:
    515
    #51
    This thread just keeps going "Braaiiinss... braiinnns" as it lumbers on Romero style.

    The notion of listing what you like about an editor is a good one, but problematic for me; I ended up on Flo's Notepad 2 (as I said nearly three years ago) not so much out of features I liked, but the lack of features I dislike and/or the ability to turn them off.

    As I said at that time, so much of the crap people seem to call "Features" just get in my damned way... reducing the list of features to relatively simple stuff that most all of them should have.

    MUST HAVE:

    1) Ability to turn off crap I don't want, like or use.

    2) Tab translation (spaces to tabs, tabs to spaces, ability to set tab-stops)

    3) Guides and rules -- as in lines or characters on the screen to hint where things are -- like indentation guides, word-wrap guides, ability to set a long-line rule that is strictly a visual hint, etc.

    4) strip trailing whitespaces automatically on save or manually as needed

    5) single file instances so if you try to open the same file more than once it takes you to the existing editor window

    6) Regex search and replace

    7) Word count, character count, selected count

    8) multiple character encoding support

    9) visual tracking of insert/delete state

    10) Brace matching

    11) separate windows for each file. Stuffing everything into tabs, defaulting to tabbed behaviors from the start, cramming everything into "tiles" when you do want multiple things open at once really isn't all that useful.

    12) JUST LET ME ****ing TYPE SOME *** ****ED MOTHER ****ing CODE!!! There's a reason I consider modal editors like vi and emacs to be trips with Mr. Peabody to go see what the Doctor is up to. If I wanted to dick around like that I'd still be using edlin!

    It's far easier for me to list the things I DON'T like editors to have, or things they LOVE to shove down your throat.

    HOW TO MAKE ME GIVE AN EDITOR A DOUBLE BIRD:

    1) Colour syntax highlighting. If I can't turn said illegible acid trip of colours off, or have to spend more than 5 seconds to do so, goodbye. I seriously don't know how anyone finds said feature useful; at best it's a gimmick, at worst it seems to make people punctuation blind and more prone to relying on the tool than their brains. Seriously, how do people READ that rubbish? (admittedly I'm saying that about most of the garbage people are calling "design" right now)

    2) Tabs with no windowing option. I use multiple displays when developing, but even when I don't I have all this screen space sucked down by a perfectly good tool called a "taskbar", so why the **** would I want even more screen space better used for editing sucked down by an extra set of tabs, and everything shoved into one crappy window. So far as I'm concerned tabbed editing can go leap off a tall cliff.

    3) Autocomplete -- should be called auto ***-up. Spend more time correcting what it's trying to do or having it screw with me than actually just typing code -- of course by the time you deal with said pile of halfwit rubbish you could have just typed the damned thing anyways so I really don't get the point.

    4) Project management -- more screen wasting crap more prone to screwing up a project than helping. Admittedly I say the same thing about version control software which seems to me to be more of a crutch for people with poor project management skills. Either that or I've been at this **** for WAY too many years.

    5) Code Folding -- if your project is so complex you feel the need to hide blocks of it just to follow the logic instead of "OH NOES" scrolling up and down, there is something horrifyingly and terrifyingly wrong with your code. That I've repeatedly watched other developers ignore where their actual error was becuase they hid the block the error was in? Mind-blowing dumbass nonsense.

    6) UI doesn't obey the system metric -- should be a minor nitpick, until that crappy 12px tall font leaves you squinting at the display to try and figure out what the menu options say; sometimes this goes hand in hand with default colour schemes (like the current hot trend of dark gray on darker gray) that leaves one going "How the **** do you read that either?!?". Then you see people hunkered over their screens with their head plastered 6" from the display... "Oh, that's how. Isn't that uncomfortable?"

    But then I watch most people use technology now and cringe in horror at the back strain, eye strain, carpal and other things we learned about 20 years ago coming home to roost yet again. The way most people hunker over the keyboard to the point it's so close their elbows are at their sides, with their head so close that if the LCD is CCFL lit they're burning their retina's out with the UV exposure... and to think people used to complain about CRT's.

    It's like the crApple phone users who complain about the pixel scaling of "low res" (by their standards) images that you can only see if you're holding the display 6" from your face -- I've watched people use them that way and it's just... how is that even comfortable much less usable?

    ---------------------------------------

    In general though it really comes down to "Oh for **** sake just let me type my damned code!" -- and too many editors, IDE's and RAD's just get in the damned way of that.

    A great many editors seem carefully crafted to make people work harder, not smarter. eMacs (sorry Gary) is the pinnacle of this, much of that coming from its back room *nix server geek beginnings. There's a reason I'm STILL not convinced this is a joke and most *nix origins command line editors still reek of the "How hard can we make this while still finding people who will be duped into thinking it's useful?" mentality. Hence the joke about how emacs users spend more time writing macros than they do writing code.

    Many IDE's (eclipse for example) seem to have taken that thinking and run with it, until the screen is so full of other crap you're left with a 4" x 6" area on a 27" 2560x1440 display for doing what you are actually in the editor to do -- WRITE CODE. I look at the little tiny box left over in editors like brackets or atom and wonder how the blazes anyone actually gets and work done in them...

    Of course that plays into why many seem to be under the delusion that halfwit pre-processor nonsense like LESS or SASS serve legitimate purposes, much less all these garbage framework asshattery like jQueery or Bootcrap that either prevent people from learning how anything actually works, or results in them blindly trusting code written by people who to be frank, seem to have no damned business writing code for others in the first place. If they had more space to see the code, spent more time learning to code properly, and stopped slapping together other people's snippets any-old-way, they'd quickly realize how badly they are neutering their workflow.

    You mix in absolute bloated overpriced dumbass garbage like Dreamweaver, and one begins to question the sanity much less intelligence of those dumb enough to use such idiocy.

    But then I'm starting to feel like I could do a better job writing code over teletype at 150 baud than some of the crap I see people sleazing out in tools like Eclipse, NetBeans, or Christmas help us Visual Studio.

    ... again though, maybe I've just been at this **** for too long. It sucks seeing generation after generation repeat the same mistakes. To be frank, 90% or more of what people have listed here so far for editing I'd sooner wrap my lips around the end of a expanding gas lead projectile linear accelerator than use. Goes hand in hand with the fact that with the direction web development has been headed the past decade or so all I have left for the industry is two middle fingers: one of the coder, and one for the source they code in on... Since apparently usability, functionality, sustainability, viability, accessibility and the rest of the things that actually matter are being sacrificed on the altar of "but it's not neat and shiny!" and "We needed it yesterday".

    Then people wonder why most web startups either fold inside a year or end up money-pits.
     
    Last edited: Aug 22, 2015
    deathshadow, Aug 22, 2015 IP
  12. PoPSiCLe

    PoPSiCLe Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    4,630
    Likes Received:
    724
    Best Answers:
    152
    Trophy Points:
    470
    #52
    @deathshadow while I find your rants amusing, and I do respect your knowledge and abilities, most of this is a matter of preference - especially this color-coding stuff you're so up in arms about - I really don't see how that is bad if one likes it. As for your outright dismissal of Sublime (not here, but in earlier discussions), I don't understand why - it does EVERYTHING on your list, except the separate window bit (which, for some reason, is possible in OSX). I still hear you claim that the set-size in the program doesn't work very well with non-standard zoom-settings (but then I've never really understood the point of those to begin with), but apart from those things the editor does all the things you want it to, and the preferences is text-files - you can edit them in a minute. Or create your own user.profile which overrides anything else set.
     
    PoPSiCLe, Aug 22, 2015 IP
    ryan_uk likes this.
  13. kk5st

    kk5st Prominent Member

    Messages:
    3,478
    Likes Received:
    363
    Best Answers:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    335
    #53
    Vi is a modal editor, emacs is not. Emacs, at its core, is a small, fast editor, probably comparable to DOS's early notepad. The core is written in C, with the bells and whistles provided by the macros; thus Editor MACroS. Further, its methods pretty much provide the editing model for the editors that followed.

    Since you didn't know that Emacs isn't a modal editor, I have to wonder whether you have actually tried it, and if you have, has time clouded your memory that much? Or are you simply repeating bad information you've heard from someone sharing his ignorance?

    I don't know where you got your negative attitude toward Unix and the back room geek's philosophy. It is spilling over into spaces where you seem to lack actual knowledge. Emacs is built from the ground up for high productivity. High on the list of reasons for Emacs's efficiency is that anything and everything that can be done can be done from the keyboard. Also up there are the very macros you denigrate. Unix geeks believe computers should be used. If you have to do something more than twice, you should automate it; you know, write a script, a binary utility or (Heavens!) a macro to do it.

    I went through your lists of wants and don't wants. Emacs does everything you want* and allows you to kill everything you don't want*. So from where does your prejudice come?

    Command line editors? You mean like Emacs -nw, Vi, pico, joe, etc.? I'd include notepad, except that it doesn't play nicely with non-MS newlines, and Editor is 16bit and won't run on a 64bit machine. Way to go MSFT. If you're running the editor in a terminal, what is it you expect?

    As for writing macros, see my comment above. Automate. Emacs is completely extensible. Good coders tend to enjoy coding and if they think they can make an improvement in their own productivity, they'll do it. Once done, they tend to make it available to others. If it solves problems (consider the software company which wrote their own C++ formating mode) it will likely be published in a package repository.

    gary

    * There are two or three items I'm not completely sure of, but that's because they were things I care nothing about one way or the other, or maybe Emacs just does the right thing for me by default. I'm not going to delve into the manual to check, though. ~g
     
    kk5st, Aug 22, 2015 IP
    ryan_uk likes this.
  14. deathshadow

    deathshadow Acclaimed Member

    Messages:
    8,976
    Likes Received:
    1,635
    Best Answers:
    233
    Trophy Points:
    515
    #54
    Sorry, missed a word and that led to some confusion. The word being "cryptic" -- Vi is modal, emacs (like a lot of other editors, Joe for example) are CRYPTIC.

    What do I mean by cryptic, I mean needlessly uselessly convoluted keyboard shortcuts that remind me WAY too much of Wordstar or Wordperfect before we had GUI's where everything was based on the fact that most computer keyboards in the 1970's didn't even have arrow keys much less more than four function keys, others shared arrow keys making them hard to use (commodore's come to mind on that), or were stuck operating in a 6 bit character space. (see the idiocy that is base64 on exponent of 8 hardware). It gets worse in some needlessly and pointlessly cryptic programming languages (anything based on C for example) or shell interfaces (sh so by extension bash) that ended up equally filled with pointless hard to remember abbreviations compared even to their microcomputer counterparts.

    Which is why when many of those tools made the jump from big iron to 8 and 16 bit micro's, they were only welcomed by the people who had used them on mainframes, and did little but piss off people who were used to microcomputer tools that DIDN'T SUCK. Wordstar immediately comes to mind for that given it was damned near useless (^K B, ^K K, ^K V, ^F, ^U) and there's a reason Microsoft abandoning that legacy and going their own way based on the XT and AT keyboard layouts buried both within months of its introduction. (even on Xenix since by that time most people were using VT-100 style terminals that actually had more than the 54 keys of a 1960's teletype). Or Wordperfect where the only way the software could even approach usable was to put a cutout template around the function keys.

    There's a reason the only people still using Wordstar commands are the folks ridiculously tied to Borland legacy IDE's -- so I stare in wonder that people are still using the MORE crytic commands of VI, the nonsensical "let's just make up our own words for things so you'll NEVER remember the shortcuts" of emacs, and legacy computing crap that should have (and damned near did) died off during the microcomputer revolution of the 1980's that left those back-room *nix geeks lonely and forgotten.

    But no, one of those back room jokers managed to turn it into a cult, and Linus dragged posix concepts kicking and screaming into the light to the point that the die-hard Linux fans are one step removed from hipsters. If a tree falls in the forest and they're is no one there to hear it then you can bet we bought the vinyl.

    BASH, vi, emacs -- It all feels like such a massive step BACKWARDS in command line interface development after the era of Disk Operating Systems. It's also a shame that you can't even say "DOS" anymore without people automatically assuming you mean MS-DOS (and by extension PC-DOS) given the plethora of different DOS (some better, some worse) that existed years before Bill took Tim Patterson for a ride. TRS-DOS, NEWDOS-80, LDOS, CP/M (on which 86-DOS that would become MS-DOS was based), PRODOS, TOS -- Hell even the UCSD P-System was technically also a DOS.

    I mean, I'd sooner use Scripsit than Vi... I'd sooner use ROM Scriptsit on a Coco than Vi.

    It all feels much like a parody of 1960's computing. It's why when suddenly *nixisms ended up back in our faces in the mid to late 1990's my reaction was "what the? Aren't we PAST this ****?!? Wasn't this the garbage that was killed off by the microcomputer revolution?!?" - It's like suddenly the mentality that killed off DEC, Wang and WYSE everywhere except the dark back-rooms on ivy league campuses came back with a vengeance just to piss on everything; yet somehow people flocked to it as if it were the newest messiah.

    There's a reason back in the magazine "80 Micro" Kitchen Table Software published "DROSSDOS", an intentionally "user hostile OS Shell" and the general public response was "It's still easier to use than Unix"

    If I wanted to still dick around on a bash command line with pointlessly cryptic tools and pointlessly cryptic and ultimately impossible to remember command line options, spending hours screwing around trying to make configuration files to do the simplest of crap that should be five clicks away... well, I'd drag the Trash-80 Model 12 out of the garage and boot up Xenix.

    Hence why whilst I can use bash to configure a server, I really would never use *nix in any version I've ever seen as a desktop OS or for actual development work. Again it's like a trip with Mr. Peabody to go visit The Doctor; Or in the case of Linux making the trip with Bill and Ted instead.

    That's why this question:
    Apart from changing MAYBE two or three values in a .conf or .ini, I wouldn't be running a editor in a terminal since that would be live edits; something one shouldn't be doing in the first damned place. It is also why of all the craptastic terminal editors only nano even comes close to useable for me, and that's probably because it leaves just enough of the goofy keyboard shortcuts I'd NEVER be able to remember or find visible on the screen I can squeak by with it.

    Of all the editors available on Linux I've tried, the only one that even came CLOSE to passable was gedit (aka what's built into Gnome) and it's still a Tinkertoy (like every other program on X Windows) compared to the "windows world" counterparts. Even Scite is barely functional which is why I use Flo's instead on Windows -- both are built of Scintilla; Scite comes across as a glorified tech demo, Flo's feels more like an actual program.

    IF emacs can be configured to work how I want, I'll be buggered all if I can figure out how to make it do it; or it simply takes too damned much time dicking around first to make it do it. I get that feeling with a lot of *nix programs where it's like they expect you to have an encyclopedic knowledge of 500 pages of poorly written poorly organized documentation (if you can even call it documentation) to get to the point I'd expect to not need more than five checkboxes and one dialog window to accomplish! Hello, Digital Equipment called from 1978, they want their methodologies back. -- pathetic when we're talking stuff Borland could have documented in a page and a half.

    Though it's a laugh when you say this:
    As that makes me suspect we have radically different definitions of what small and fast means. When I can outrun the damned keyboard buffer running it locally... fast is not a word I'd use to describe it. A 10+ megabyte executable is not what I'd call small for an EDITOR. When you can't even fit it onto a 1.2 meg floppy for what it does, there's something horribly and terrifyingly wrong with it! (compared to Flo's which is just a scintilla build, which in it's entirety is a 898k executable)

    ... and don't even get me STARTED about it's LACK of speed and ridiculous memory footprint that makes the original WordPerfect for Windows look outright svelt.

    Oh, and when you said "editor" can I assume you meant "edit.com" from MS-DOS 5 and later? The bit about ragging on MS over a 16 bit executable tied directly to an OS that doesn't even exist anymore underneath the host operating system (and hasn't since the switch to NT instead of 32s) reeks of some pretty hefty ignorance of what OS are, what processor targets are, and the limitations of binary distribution. You going to complain that Wordstar, Visicalc and Harvard Graphics don't run on win64 either and blame M$ for that too?!? Also kind-of funny you comparing emacs to that or notepad given the code ratio averaging around 54:1. (even the 413 byte edit.com counts as around 194k since it just wraps qbasic.exe for the functionality)

    That could simply be it. Like everything else on the *nix command line or descended from the "posix state of mind" it just pisses me off the same way it did 30 years ago in Xenix on "business machines" like the TRS-80 Model II/12/16 or on mainframes like the PDP-11 or ASA-400. Stuff that as someone who grew up using computers during the microcomputer revolution felt more like outdated 1970's crap than actual progress... and remember, that's coming from someone who entered their first code one bit at a time on toggle switches. Remember when *nixisms were something to be ridiculed, scoffed at and the reason many "big iron" companies were driving themselves into obscurity? I do. I even worked for a few of said companies and dealt with the frustration of dealing with upper management who just didn't understand that the age of the mainframe was over.

    That you'd even have to say that is part of why I can't stand it. That there's even a "manual" that you'd HAVE to delve into for an EDITOR pretty much puts the exclamation point on everything wrong with it. This isn't a programming language, if it's complex enough to have anything more than a two page pamphlet, it's probably the wrong tool for use as a developers editor.

    Though at least someone at some point turned it into HTML, given what utterly useless crap "man pages" are and always have been.

    For me having used computers for nearly a decade before even encountering a *nix in person, (well unless you count OS/9 for the Coco, and that really wasn't a *nix) it all just feels backwards, outmoded, and more suited to teletypes and dumb terminals than anything "modern". It feels outdated compared to what we had on 8 bit computers like the TRS-80 once disk systems got involved, much less what was in regular use by the time DOS 5 was commonplace.

    Sadly it seems like GUI's are heading down that same path of neutering functionality, adding bloat and pissing on accessibility... See how for me at least Win 98 was the pinnacle of UI design and everything since are steps backwards. (hence why I can't wait for Wednesday when the two weeks I'm forcing myself to use 10 are up, and I'll go back to 8.1... Didn't think 8.1 was gonna be the tock, but it was).

    No question -- I just don't get other people's preferences, just as it seems many don't understand mine.

    It's an illegible mess that seems to create mistakes. I didn't like it when Borland added it to Turbo Pascal 4 back in the '80's, and I've seen nothing to make it likeable, useable or functional since. The only way I could see it being actually usable is if you were colour blind. I just can't read text that way, in a "somebody cut me a Tylenol" fashion. It was that way 30 years ago when I was fully sighted, now that I'm not it's even more of a pain in the ass.

    OSX has a 'forced' MDI policy. MDI == Multiple Document Interface. Programs on it are NOT supposed to "occupy a window" or be restricted in that manner; this goes all the way back to the original OS for the Apple LISA and is one of the few things (along with "hey let's make program directories a "package" that's executable so installation and de-install is just copy/delete of the package", or mandatory ASIO support) from the Apple world I have the slightest bit of fondness for. Windows are for documents, NOT for programs -- hence why the current program is always in dominant control of the single window menu. I always found that part a bit confusing and counter-intuitive, but the persistence of the MDI part does make sense and is often more useful than the "let's cram 20 documents into one window" that comes about from how windows programmers think.

    Not sure what you mean by "non-standard" or zoom for that matter, but again people seem to mistake different system metrics for "zoom" when they are not. That the UI itself ignores the host OS font size, the non-standard menu behavior and general "we spun our own UI" reeks of it being a Java Swing Crapplet -- despite it apparently NOT being one and instead being built in python.

    It's fat, it's bloated, it's slow, I can outrun the keyboard buffer when using it, and by the time (and we do mean TIME) I get it even CLOSE to working how I'd want, I could have written five pages of site content. (as opposed to emacs where by the time I get it working how I want I could write an entire CMS from scratch) -- REALLY sad is compared to some of the garbage coming out now (brackets, atom) Sublime stands out like a bright shining star.

    That said for all it's faults I will use it on OSX if time is a factor since the options there are pretty sparse in terms of anything useful, but again I'd sooner suck the business end of an "expanding gas lead projectile accelerator" than try to use OSX (or linux) for development work -- and on Windows there are far, FAR better alternatives.

    Admittedly a LOT of that hostility towards OSX was further fueled by the 10 gigabyte monstrosity that is x-code and that I STILL can't seem to get OpenGL on SDL to work there. You know an OS is jacked when it's harder to configure their GUI driven tool than it is to do the same task from Linsux. (honestly I was shocked how EASY it is to make a program that uses OpenGL on top of SDL compile on Linux!)

    But you're right, it's about preference -- I know my workflow would confuse the crap out of most people, just as their workflow patterns would make me cringe. Problem is when that preference COSTS time and effort which seems all to prevalent -- even worse when said inefficiencies seem to be promoted as the exact opposite of what they deliver! Many tools people use seem to just encourage sloppy coding or mistakes, and I just don't see how that's attractive.

    But remember, I'm the guy who can't learn visual programming (seriously, it's some form of mental block) despite being able to hand assemble my own Z80 and 8086 machine language, can't use version control software without it screwing over the project I'm working on (Always just considered such software to be crutches for poor managerial skills), etc, etc...

    ... and again, another admission; I say the same thing about C and everything based on C. "memory leak by design". Probably again stems from my first "high level" languages being Wirth family, and having gone to those straight from ASM since the only other alternative at the time, BASIC, was a useless rinky toy. It's not like there even were mainstream affordable C compilers until the late 1980's. Gave me a whole different understanding and perception than those who came up in the 90's or later, or those who were in handful of places that actually used Unix for... anything.
     
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2015
    deathshadow, Aug 23, 2015 IP
  15. PoPSiCLe

    PoPSiCLe Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    4,630
    Likes Received:
    724
    Best Answers:
    152
    Trophy Points:
    470
    #55
    Well, "zoom" was perhaps the wrong word to use, but okay "non-default DPI-settings" then. Which I don't need. So it's not an issue. I run Sublime with a set font-size of "9" in the user.profile, and that suits me just fine on a full-HD screen. I might have to alter that a tiny bit when I upgrade to 4k monitors, but probably not by that much. But then I'm also a guy who set up everything using small icons everywhere. I have decent eyesight ;)
    As for the colorsyntax, I prefer it, as it makes it easy to pinpoint specific types of code on a page - functions, queries etc. without having to scan through each line - granted, I could probably spot it just as easily without, as long as I'm working on my own code, but since I'm not always doing that, syntax highlighting is a good help. Personally, I find a huge file without any colorcoding to be more or less illegibel, simply because it's much harder to separate essentials from non-essentials. I also like bracket-matching, guide-lines etc. They're a help, and most of the time works to improve productivity.
    I've also got a bit of a problem with you saying you outrun the keyboard buffer - either you type INSANELY fast (which of course, you might), or your keyboard has a problem (no N-rollover) - I'm a fairly fast typist, and I can't, even if I'm just typing regular text, manage to outrun the keyboard buffer in Sublime.
     
    PoPSiCLe, Aug 23, 2015 IP
  16. deathshadow

    deathshadow Acclaimed Member

    Messages:
    8,976
    Likes Received:
    1,635
    Best Answers:
    233
    Trophy Points:
    515
    #56
    I've been using it since Windows 3.0 -- used to be commonly used as a trick to deal with serif quality in the age before font smoothing; you ran the resolution one notch higher and then upped the font sizes to "8514 / Large" to get the same size text built from more pixels. Higher pixel density == less jaggies. If you had a 14" CRT you ran 800x600 instead of 640x480... you had a 15" you ran 1024x768 instead of 800x600, you had a 19" you ran 1600x1200... and so forth.

    It's why Windows has had scaling capability since the late 1980's whilst Apple's been bragging about adding it for what, five years? Sadly with Windows 10, it seems M$ is bound and determined to piss away that accessibility aspect of the OS -- sad when 8.1 was in many ways a return to classic functionality on that. They're actually trying to replace it WITH zoom, and really that's NOT a great option given how it screws over a LOT of usability.

    A lot of that is probably also viewing distance -- up above my ragging on how people sit at the machines just ASKING for injury? Yeah, that. Like when I'm using a laptop sitting there typing I usually keep the screen about two to two and a half feet away -- aka my arms fully extended so as to avoid carpal. You know why those ergonomic keyboards crank the elbows out into that funky angle? That's to force the arms into an extended position -- at which point you can get greater functionality just by sitting farther away! If I'm over at my workstation that 27' 2560x1440 display is anywhere from 3 to four feet away against the wall. Sitting closer causes eye strain, can actually make you nearsighted over time, induce headaches, and cause all sorts of other long-term injury.

    Didn't yo mamma ever yell at you not to sit so close to the TV?

    The legacy VGA scale fonts are increasingly becoming useless -- it's why mobile has done away with the concept entirely, it's why windows has had the option for different size fonts api-wide application-wide since day one (since it had to support multiple different resolutions of differing aspects!). Failing to support that, PARTICULARLY at the application level when the damned OS API is ready and willing to do that work FOR YOU?!? Herpafreakingderp -- and sadly I'm seeing that more and more on menus and dialog boxes in programs where they are so broken as to be useless to users like myself.

    I can see how it might be useful on other people's crap code where they use cryptic names or intentional obfuscation, or simply don't know what a tab key is -- except for the fact that it makes me unable to read an entire like of code "at a glance" or even "at once". Every time the colour changes you might as well insert a page feed; that's how "useful" it is to me.

    Though running crappy formatted code through a beautifier never hurts... that would be my first step long before trying to make sense of the illegible acid-trip of colours.

    Have you ever noticed how I can make a 10k post in about a minute?

    It was often a problem back in the XT and earlier days, but the crappy keyboards often limited that just because they sucked to type on. When I'm on my crappy HP "bedridden" laptop for example my typing speed is cut in half...

    But you put me on one of my systems with a Model M, or this MSI laptop with the steelseries mechanical keyboard in it, and I can belt out a post this size in the time it takes most of today's mouth-breathing twitter generation to barely use half the 140 character limit. (then people wonder why I consider twitter useless pointless crap).

    It STOPPED being a problem roughly around the time the AT came out. Gee, wasn't that the system that introduced not only the model M keyboard, but also the AT 101 layout on which EVERY modern desktop keyboard is a derivitive in terms of layout?

    MYSTERIOUSLY this problem seems to crop up in a lot of the 'recent' editors, some being worse than others. I suspect a lot of that is just the crappy interpreted languages they are built in. Sublime for example is python, a painfully slow interpreted language. (could be worse, they could have used Ruby turning that pain into outright agony)... I suspect many of the problems I have with it in terms of speed, performance AND appearance all stem from the tools used in it's construction AND the choice of language since -- as I've said before -- it feels more like a Java crapplet than a native application. That's why I'm REALLY unimpressed with Brackets and Atom (despite having fun screwing around with Electron, formerly known as Atom Shell -- I admit I'm just screwing around there) -- both are basically web applications, with all the caveats and drawbacks common to same. It's also why I would LIKE to like vivaldi, but the performance, control issues, and other failings leave it far short of what I'd consider as a daily driver.

    Generally speaking I have the same issues with web crapplets that seem to perform worse than the same programs did as native apps on 386 systems twenty-five years ago -- that seem to be HARDER to develop. It's like the hardware technology keeps moving forward, but the software is in a time-warp to the WORST of ~1994ish, if not earlier; just as web development appears to have had the onset of arrested development circa 1997, made worse by actively encouraging people to use bloated slow methodologies and mindsets to bury the legitimate improvements of the past two decades.

    Having been there as a developer in the '80's and '90's, I recognize the same old **** even under the bondo and slap of paint.
     
    deathshadow, Aug 23, 2015 IP
  17. freelance varma

    freelance varma Greenhorn

    Messages:
    9
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    21
    #57
    Hi Formicin,

    EditPlus is also a good text editor,The editor contains tools for programmers, including syntax highlighting (and support for custom syntax files), file type conversions, line ending conversion (between Linux, Windows and Mac styles), regular expressions for search-and-replace, keystroke, spell check, full support for Unicode editing, customizable keyboard shortcuts, auto-completion, code folding, and more. Files can be browsed and edited in tabs, and an internal file browser is implemented in the software.

    Thanks
     
    freelance varma, Aug 26, 2015 IP
  18. webcosmo

    webcosmo Notable Member

    Messages:
    5,842
    Likes Received:
    153
    Best Answers:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    255
    #58
    Web Storm is also good.
     
    webcosmo, Aug 27, 2015 IP
  19. hafilali

    hafilali Member

    Messages:
    42
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    26
    #59
    aptana studio or notepad ++both are good.
     
    hafilali, Sep 7, 2015 IP
  20. mmerlinn

    mmerlinn Notable Member

    Messages:
    2,261
    Likes Received:
    286
    Best Answers:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    290
    #60
    I am sure all of these are good. I just am not sure what they are good for. Maybe the circular file?

    If they are good for something, explain to me what they are good for, and WHY.
     
    mmerlinn, Sep 7, 2015 IP
    kk5st likes this.