quizenergylife.blogg.se - Text editor for mac terminal tem

Text editor for mac terminal tem how to#
Text editor for mac terminal tem mac os x#
Text editor for mac terminal tem code#
Text editor for mac terminal tem license#

Here's a killer: no integration with native OS X clipboard. It handles large text files easily (eg 70k+ lines), where programs like subethaedit think for ages. Memory consumption is low, and it's fast. I guess I could live with this editor if I invested the time in using it. Unixy CTRL-A for start-of-line and CTRL-E for end-of line work fine, but Apple-S for save doesn't. That's not so bad - the window furniture is fairly minimal, so no great overhead.ĭownside #3: Keyboard shortcuts are cumbersome. I can probably achieve vertical splits by opening new windows.

Split screen works well, but only horizontal splits AFAICT.

Text editor for mac terminal tem how to#

The only available font sucks, which means I probably need to dig through the fine manual to find out how to add more, or make it support OS X native fonts if possible. At least the OS X version has some icons, looks presentable out of the box, and is reasonably usable straight away.Īnother plus is that it's obviously capable of XML/SGML validation etc., I can see it checking tags when I open/close them.ĭownside #1: fonts. I used an Emacs derivative years ago on the Amiga, which is why I have split-screen addiction. I used Emacs for OS X 10.3 Panther build.įirst impressions of Emacs is that it isn't too horrific. There's some unfortunate display corruption going on though - I don't think the default font is too happy. We can split windows, and memory consumption is low. No Apple-S saving here though, and we have the mode-driven GUI: 'i' to insert, escape, then :w to write. So, out of the box it has a nice small font, decent syntax hightlighting and integration with OS X for opening files. It lacks all the advantages of a modern GUI interface. That's exactly the problem though: it's useful to know but only as a fall-back. most useful of tools, it can be depended on to be on any unix-like machine anywhere, a handy fall-back if all else fails. Probably because it does nothing fancy or useful. Interesting to note that it only uses 6.7mb with the two test files loaded. It's nice and friendly but not built for full-time editing. Yeah, you're right, I'm not seriously proposing to use nano for anything more than very casual quick edits. If I mark a particular criteria as '?' it means the product was so tediously unfriendly I never investigated it I'm sure some editor sycophant will let me know. Memory consumption was guestimated using OS X's Activity Monitor, looking at the value for "Real Memory" usage. The test was simple - try editing this very page in each of the editors. There's a reason I'm on this platform, after all.

mac support: it should be fully-integrated with the mac.

I spend most of the time on the command-line anyhow.

source control integration: nice, but not required.

An editor that is reasonable in its requirements is a must.

small footprint: with cocoon, jetty, tomcat, firefox, and mail, there's not much room left.

Building from within the editor is preferable, but not required. XML support is a must: preferably tag completion and well-formed checks.

Text editor for mac terminal tem code#

language support: i want syntax highlighting, folding, code completion optional.

I want to be able to split the screen at least horizontally, preferably vertically too.

visually useful: maximise the edit area, reduce menus, icons etc.

sensible price: I'm thinking £50 is the sweet-spot, but I'd stretch to maybe £70.

Text editor for mac terminal tem license#

license: an open source license is preferable for all the obvious reasons.

Of the various editors out there, as I search for a new one. I'm fussy when it comes to editors, I can never seem

Text editor for mac terminal tem mac os x#

Editors on Mac OS X Editors on Mac OS X Introduction