On Fri, 2006-28-04 at 21:52 -0700, Michael A. Peters wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 22:01 -0400, Dan wrote:
>
> > I use gedit for all my HTML, CSS, and PHP editing needs, once the file
> > has the proper extension (.html, .css, .php, etc) it comes up with very
> > excellent (though not flawless) syntax highlighting. Quick, easy,
> > universal. It's better to learn the coding than to let a frontend come
> > up with its own often messy code anyway.
>
> I agree - that's why I use emacs + auctex for LaTeX and bluefish for
> html. Both of them are text editors that (imho) happen to be better than
> gedit for their respective purposes.
Nirvana Editor {nedit} is my preference for GUI text editing, vim
for console text editing. Emacs is powerful but it's complex keystroke
commands underwhelm me. I have used a ton of different console based
text editors over the last few decades and emacs is the most convoluted
I can remember. There were worse editors, but none that I can remember
that used such complicated command syntax. I used to use pico for
quick edits, and vi for all the tricky stuff, but since nedit can do
both and all the machine I work with have enough power and bandwidth
to run nedit over ssh forwarded X, it is what I prefer, but sometimes
I still use vi, for quick jobs.
For newbies who are patient and have lots of time, emacs would be a
good thing to learn. If you are looking for an easy to use powerful
text editor nedit is great and has many more features than gedit.
