I decided not to spend time on it because I don't think literate programming can be done properly with only a text editor, I think you need support from the programming language itself or some software for "weaving" the documentation with the code etc. But you might disagree!
I do think literate programming could be a good response to slop, helping people understand code.
I apologize, you appear to be right. I must have misremembered it being terminal software, perhaps because the screenshots look like terminals a little.
Elvis (vi-like), initially released in 1990, the default vi clone on slackware, it's become my default vi-like. ed (line editor, the original unix editor), initially released in '73, more usable than it's given credit for, if you take a bit to learn it, still less usable than most editors that are designed for a terminal, rather than a teleprinter. JOE (basically wordstar as a text editor), from '91, If anyone installed it by default, I'd recommend it over nano for new users.
Questo sito utilizza cookie per riconosce gli utenti loggati e quelli che tornano a visitare. Proseguendo la navigazione su questo sito, accetti l'utilizzo di questi cookie.
4censord
in reply to Alexia • • •Alexia
in reply to 4censord • • •Nelson
in reply to Alexia • • •I don't use this editor, but I came across Leo while researching literate programming:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_%28tβ¦
I decided not to spend time on it because I don't think literate programming can be done properly with only a text editor, I think you need support from the programming language itself or some software for "weaving" the documentation with the code etc. But you might disagree!
I do think literate programming could be a good response to slop, helping people understand code.
Leo (text editor) - Wikipedia
Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)Alexia
in reply to Nelson • • •Nelson
in reply to Alexia • • •Alexia
in reply to Alexia • • •okay it seems no one has what I am looking for π
it's all just "nano" and "emacs" which I both Don't Like, I already tried
the other options are all modal editors, which I also don't like just in general, and no I am not willing to argue on that
Alexia
in reply to Alexia • • •I guess my only options if I'm looking for something semi-modern is a bunch of modal editors.
micro could be great, if it actually was
IAG
in reply to Alexia • • •Lucy
in reply to Alexia • • •SleepyCat
in reply to Alexia • • •Stilic π«π·
in reply to Alexia • • •Spike
in reply to Alexia • • •emacs -nwSpike
in reply to Spike • • •Sensitive content
@alexia
V
in reply to Alexia • • •Sensitive content
ed (line editor, the original unix editor), initially released in '73, more usable than it's given credit for, if you take a bit to learn it, still less usable than most editors that are designed for a terminal, rather than a teleprinter.
JOE (basically wordstar as a text editor), from '91, If anyone installed it by default, I'd recommend it over nano for new users.
V
in reply to V • • •Sensitive content
ππ©·πBrettπ‘ππ§
in reply to Alexia • • •vis: A text editor combining modal editing with structural regular expressions.
sr.htHaelwenn /ΡΠ»Π²ΡΠ½/
in reply to ππ©·πBrettπ‘ππ§ • • •@brettm Yeah that one's nice, been using (and packaging) it for ~10 years ^^
Pretty minimal but also means it's slow paced and easily forkable should anything turn sour.
ππ©·πBrettπ‘ππ§
in reply to Alexia • • •the thing
in reply to Alexia • • •nanoβNiko
in reply to Alexia • • •Alexia
in reply to Niko • • •Elena ``of Valhalla''
in reply to Alexia • •@Alexia my partner is quite happy with joe-editor.sourceforge.net/
(It's not vi-like enough for me to want to use it, which is probably a good thing for you)
Alexia likes this.
Diego Roversi
in reply to Alexia • •