emacs or quanta

[Nick Mudge]

I want to write Web pages with PHP, HTML, MySQL and Javascript. I've been
wondering about what editor to use in my developement. I have linux so it
would have to run on linux. I am used to Windows so I am thinking that I
should use Quanta. But there are the emac and xmac and the vi editors. I am
not familiar with how those work, but would I be missing out on them if I
decide not to use them? Would they be better than Quanta or Bluefish?
And I am also wondering if which is better Quanta or Bluefish. Does anybody
know? See I'm trying to figure out what would be best. I plan to do lots
of Web development.

Nick

[Herbie Cumberland]

Re: emacs or quanta

In message-id <G0OAc.75710$Sw .40389@attbi_s5 1>,
Nick Mudge wrote:
[color=blue]
>I want to write Web pages with PHP, HTML, MySQL and Javascript. I've been
>wondering about what editor to use in my developement. I have linux so it
>would have to run on linux. I am used to Windows so I am thinking that I
>should use Quanta. But there are the emac and xmac and the vi editors. I am
>not familiar with how those work, but would I be missing out on them if I
>decide not to use them? Would they be better than Quanta or Bluefish?
>And I am also wondering if which is better Quanta or Bluefish. Does anybody
>know? See I'm trying to figure out what would be best. I plan to do lots
>of Web development.[/color]

vi is the first thing you should get to grips with.

it is unlike anything you will have come across in windows (unless you
are familiar with ms-dos's 'edlin', then it might make some sense),
but it is essential if you want to work with *nix.

emacs is lovely, but, you can't rely on it being on a client's
system... vi is almost always there.

anything else is a waste of time if you're serious about *nix.

:wq

[Herbie Cumberland]

Re: emacs or quanta

apologies for replying to own post

In message-id <o2d7d09mc7iqpd suf1mb124tr4vqo 1d3ug@4ax.com>,
Herbie Cumberland wrote:
[color=blue]
>vi is the first thing you should get to grips with.[/color]

[qualifier]
i'm talking about terminal mode here - no GUI shite like GVIM
[/qualifier]

[Nick Mudge]

Re: emacs or quanta


I am not serious about linux or windows. I am serious about writing web
sites. I just happen to be on linux. Does anybody recommend a good Web
development editor?

Nick

Herbie Cumberland wrote:
[color=blue]
> In message-id <G0OAc.75710$Sw .40389@attbi_s5 1>,
> Nick Mudge wrote:
>[color=green]
>>I want to write Web pages with PHP, HTML, MySQL and Javascript. I've been
>>wondering about what editor to use in my developement. I have linux so it
>>would have to run on linux. I am used to Windows so I am thinking that I
>>should use Quanta. But there are the emac and xmac and the vi editors. I
>>am not familiar with how those work, but would I be missing out on them if
>>I
>>decide not to use them? Would they be better than Quanta or Bluefish?
>>And I am also wondering if which is better Quanta or Bluefish. Does
>>anybody
>>know? See I'm trying to figure out what would be best. I plan to do lots
>>of Web development.[/color]
>
> vi is the first thing you should get to grips with.
>
> it is unlike anything you will have come across in windows (unless you
> are familiar with ms-dos's 'edlin', then it might make some sense),
> but it is essential if you want to work with *nix.
>
> emacs is lovely, but, you can't rely on it being on a client's
> system... vi is almost always there.
>
> anything else is a waste of time if you're serious about *nix.
>
> :wq[/color]

[Lothar Scholz]

Re: emacs or quanta

On Sat, 19 Jun 2004 04:48:12 GMT, Nick Mudge <mark1822@hotma il.com>
wrote:
[color=blue]
>
>I am not serious about linux or windows. I am serious about writing web
>sites. I just happen to be on linux. Does anybody recommend a good Web
>development editor?
>[/color]

If this is your first time working on linux, worked a lot on windows
and don't have to much spare time my advise is to stay away from Emacs
and VI. Both have a high learning curve and will give you a culture
shock.

And i don't think they over so much more then other editors if you
want to do web development - i just think that the emacs days are more
and more over (i used this editor for a decade and speak emacs lisp
fluently - but last year i left this world behind me).

[Herbie Cumberland]

Re: emacs or quanta

In message-id <unj7d01ebj75cj mb0gj97897i6jgo om4mu@4ax.com>,
Lothar Scholz wrote:
[color=blue]
>If this is your first time working on linux, worked a lot on windows
>and don't have to much spare time my advise is to stay away from Emacs
>and VI.[/color]

it depends what you need to do... if your requirements will be
maintenance of remote systems then you cannot rely on anything being
available, although it's a good bet that vi will be there somewhere.

if you're developing on a local machine and will never need to
ssh/telnet into another host then use whatever you like.

i used to use a highly customised emacs on my own machine when i
started, and i prided myself on my emacs tweaking ability, but when i
started to have responsibility for other machines where a plain
terminal connection was the only thing going, i soon changed my mind,

i now use vi for all text editing tasks on *nix.
[color=blue]
>Both have a high learning curve and will give you a culture shock.[/color]

yes, but if you've got a modicum of sense and an analytical mind
(without either of which one can not be a programmer) then the vi
learning curve is kind of something like this:

| /
K | /
N | the vi learning curve /
O | /
W | /
L | /
E | /
D | /
G | /
| /\ /
| / \ /
| / \__________ /
| / \ /
| / \___/
| _/\/
| /
| _/\/
|__/
+--------------------------------------------------
TIME

[color=blue]
>
>And i don't think they over so much more then other editors if you
>want to do web development - i just think that the emacs days are more
>and more over (i used this editor for a decade and speak emacs lisp
>fluently - but last year i left this world behind me).[/color]

macos?

[Lothar Scholz]

Re: emacs or quanta

On Sat, 19 Jun 2004 07:09:51 +0100, Herbie Cumberland
<non-existant@non-existant.tld> wrote:
[color=blue]
>it depends what you need to do... if your requirements will be
>maintenance of remote systems then you cannot rely on anything being
>available, although it's a good bet that vi will be there somewhere.[/color]

Yes i still use vi for this purpose but it wasn't the question of the
original poster. No one does heavy web developing via a remote system.
[color=blue]
>if you're developing on a local machine and will never need to
>ssh/telnet into another host then use whatever you like.
>
>i used to use a highly customised emacs on my own machine when i
>started, and i prided myself on my emacs tweaking ability, but when i
>started to have responsibility for other machines where a plain
>terminal connection was the only thing going, i soon changed my mind,
>
>i now use vi for all text editing tasks on *nix.[/color]

I don't think that vi as a text mode program has a future. There are
a lot of information that a programmer could need. And textual
representation is good a good way for your mind to recognize and
remember them. Using icons, shapes and a lot of other modern UI things
can result in much more efficient work.

Remember we are not talking about text editing here anymore but about
web development. And even if you leave out WYSIWYG editing and
debugging there is much more then a string of characters.

[Herbie Cumberland]

Re: emacs or quanta

In message-id <i1p7d0181mn8dt 36a91ih7toe4lpq iomp6@4ax.com>,
Lothar Scholz wrote:
[color=blue]
>Remember we are not talking about text editing here anymore but about
>web development.[/color]

sorry, yes, i've got side-tracked.

having said that, i still do _fairly_heavy_w eb_development_ with vi(m)
over ssh - sometimes the client wants a few changes made, which turns
out to be a total re-write, before you know it, you've re-built the
whole fscking thing ;-)
[color=blue]
>And even if you leave out WYSIWYG editing and
>debugging there is much more then a string of characters.[/color]

indeed, and even vi (or vim to be precise) can do auto-indentation,
syntax highlighting, syntax checking, debugging and a huge bunch of
other stuff if you put your mind to it ... just about anything else
you want it to do, a bit like emacs really, except maybe not quite so
easy to let it take over your world ;-) ... even over a terminal
connection where no X- tools will run.

btw, WYSIWYG editing never even entered my brain threads, but i guess
that's what the OP was after... i don't have a recommendation for
that, sorry.