what IDE and compiler do you use?

Solar · Post by **Solar** » Mon Dec 11, 2006 7:50 am

At least WordPad doesn't choke on Unix-style linefeeds as Notepad does. But both don't have syntax highlighing, auto-indent, or tab-to-space conversion, and that alone are complete showstoppers for me.

But whatever floats your boat.

If you are considering TextPad, give UltraEdit a try, too. TextPad had its last release in June 2004, while UltraEdit development is still going strongly...

Walling · Post by **Walling** » Mon Dec 11, 2006 9:00 am

For editing in Windows I use Notepad2 a lot. It is nice. It opens fast, just like Notepad, has syntax highligting, UTF-8, newline conversion, regex search and much more.. but it is not "bloated". I hide the toolbar so it looks similar to Notepad. I only use the keyboard shortcuts anyway.

Edit: ... and it is open source

Brynet-Inc · Post by **Brynet-Inc** » Mon Dec 11, 2006 9:33 am

Hmm.. The more people who start relying on proprietary software the more people I have to smack with a FAH-Q stick.

http://www.scintilla.org/SciTE.html
http://notepad-plus.sourceforge.net/uk/site.htm (For you win-freaks.. It's based on Scintilla..)

inflater · Post by **inflater** » Mon Dec 11, 2006 9:39 am

Good ol' notepad, BP IDE and that is all

No freaky things like PSPad or others.

inflater

Solar · Post by **Solar** » Wed Dec 13, 2006 3:08 am

Brynet-Inc wrote:Hmm.. The more people who start relying on proprietary software the more people I have to smack with a FAH-Q stick.

Well... I take into account the feature set, the usability, the price tag, the chance of getting updates / bugfixes, and the outlook of the vendor, and then make my decision.

Free software scores high on price tag, usually high on updates / bugfixes, usually only mediocre on usability / outlook ("works for me" / "fix it yourself" / "pay for it if you want it changed"), and I haven't yet found a free editor that could stand up to UltraEdit in the feature department, especially since those morons at KDE have killed the project feature in Kate with the 3.5 release.

I am still considering using UltraEdit on Linux via wine, that's how good I think that editor is. And the author is very responsive when it comes to bug reports / improvement suggestions.

Candy · Post by **Candy** » Wed Dec 13, 2006 10:37 am

I know of a lot of people that use ultraedit or textpad, both seem to be very good. I consider UE to be pretty annoying because it does most things just a tad different than I'd like it to and both have annoying "register me" messages. Granted, they're because I don't buy the software but I just don't like them.

bubach · Post by **bubach** » Wed Dec 13, 2006 5:44 pm

Lol, didn't think i would have to say this about M$ software but.. why use OSS that need bug fixes when you have notepad (stable since win95)?

spix · Post by **spix** » Wed Dec 13, 2006 7:46 pm

Free software scores high on price tag, usually high on updates / bugfixes, usually only mediocre on usability / outlook ("works for me" / "fix it yourself" / "pay for it if you want it changed")

You did say usually, but i still think that is a pretty unfair generalization. A lot of OSS projects listen to their users and add features that they want. A lot of commercial vendors don't. So, the possibility of fixing it yourself is a positive.

I used UltraEdit Studio on Windows for a while, but always seem to go back to vim. have you tried jEdit, or Eclipse? I guess you have.

Andrew

Solar · Post by **Solar** » Wed Dec 13, 2006 10:47 pm

spix wrote:You did say usually, but i still think that is a pretty unfair generalization.

Just talking from my personal experience.

A lot of OSS projects listen to their users and add features that they want. A lot of commercial vendors don't.

Now who's generalizing?

So, the possibility of fixing it yourself is a positive.

Yep... if you have dozens of hours to spend debugging foreign code, and don't mind having to maintain your own patchset until someone upstream can be bothered to merge it...

have you tried jEdit, or Eclipse?

And SciTE, and KDevelop, nedit, and probably a couple of others I have forgotten.

spix · Post by **spix** » Wed Dec 13, 2006 11:18 pm

A lot of OSS projects listen to their users and add features that they want. A lot of commercial vendors don't.

Now who's generalizing?

I'm saying there is a sizable portion from both commercial and OSS projects that listen to there users, and a sizable portion who do not. I maybe generalizing, but I think it is a more realistic generalization.

Yep... if you have dozens of hours to spend debugging foreign code, and don't mind having to maintain your own patchset until someone upstream can be bothered to merge it...

And if you purchase a program and it doesn't have a feature you want and the devlopers don't care / don't want to include it... well how are you better off? If you have the source, you have the option. If you don't want to improve it because you don't have the time etc, you are no better off, but you are not worse off either.

I thought you were saying that if you buy a program the vendor is somehow more likely to be interested in your ideas for improvement, and in many cases this is simply not true.

Andrew

AndrewAPrice · Post by **AndrewAPrice** » Wed Dec 13, 2006 11:46 pm

When I said Tedpad before, I was actually referring to TED Notepad (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TED_Notepad), not TextPad.

TED Notepad is closed source, but I 100% agree with spix's argument that open source software is more customizable than closed source software. If there was some small bug involving a feature you require that was overlooked before the software was released, there may not be an update or patch to fix the bug in CSS, but in OSS you have the option to take on the challenge yourself.

Solar · Post by **Solar** » Thu Dec 14, 2006 3:58 am

spix wrote:I thought you were saying that if you buy a program the vendor is somehow more likely to be interested in your ideas for improvement, and in many cases this is simply not true.

Many, usually, often...

I had good experience with the commercial vendors of GoldEd and UltraEdit, and less than mediocre experience with the OSS vendors of JEdit and Kate. That's all I'm saying.

earlz · Post by **earlz** » Sat Dec 30, 2006 11:13 pm

why use OSS that need bug fixes when you have notepad (stable since win95)

Well let's see... no syntax highlighting, no line numbers to help with compiler errors, no tabbing, you have to browse through everything to open another file, there no built in debugging, there's no nifty "build" button so you have to open up another window type in "make" or "build.bat" and then wait for it to compile and see if there are any errors, umm when opening big files it will often act very slow, ummm... and can't handle unix files...so their why not to use notepad

bubach · Post by **bubach** » Sat Dec 30, 2006 11:38 pm

Actually I use ConTEXT for webdev and fasmw for os-dev. But I used to use notepad for everything. it does have line numbers, in the status field. syntax highlighting is unnecessary luxury.

Candy · Post by **Candy** » Sun Dec 31, 2006 5:02 am

bubach wrote:Lol, didn't think i would have to say this about M$ software but.. why use OSS that need bug fixes when you have notepad (stable since win95)?

Why use OSS that needs bugfixes that are actually being made when you can use closed-source Notepad that's buggy as hell and that still needs bug fixes?

PS: XP notepad isn't close to '95 notepad.