Joey Hess wrote:
Keith G. Murphy wrote:
The problem I see in 5.3 is less subtle.
It will mess up this:
$whatever =~ /thingiem/;
Thinks the 'm/' is the beginning of a match and colorizes it, messing up
subsequent lines as well!
Doesn't happen here.
Package: vim
Version:
Steve Lamb wrote:
Wednesday, May 24, 2000, 1:27:53 PM, Keith wrote:
One downside of vim that I just remembered, be careful the need for
slamming the ESC key. Windows likes to think it means shut this window
NOW!
and if you have the confirmation turned off you lose messages in your
Hi,
The worst case that I have seen in vim, is the multiline regexp
with quotes in it. And it is even worse if I only want to match
the beginning quote. See example below:
$hello =~ s{
\hello world
}{
hello
Shao Zhang hat gesagt: // Shao Zhang wrote:
The worst case that I have seen in vim, is the multiline regexp
with quotes in it. And it is even worse if I only want to match
the beginning quote. See example below:
$hello =~ s{
\hello world
Frank Barknecht hat gesagt: // Frank Barknecht wrote:
Shao Zhang hat gesagt: // Shao Zhang wrote:
The worst case that I have seen in vim, is the multiline regexp
with quotes in it. And it is even worse if I only want to match
the beginning quote. See example below:
Frank Barknecht wrote:
[cut]
Hey, no problem here with highlighting that code snippet using
VIM - Vi IMproved 5.6 (2000 Jan 16, compiled Feb 10 2000 17:28:27)
(official wichert debian package)
Hey, where can I get that? The one from frozen (vim-perl 5.6.070-1, vim
compiled May 1), gets
Steve Lamb wrote:
[cut]
The /only/ perl construct I know of that doesn't work is
something like this:
if ($foo =~ /bar\/blam/){
}
The problem I see in 5.3 is less subtle.
It will mess up this:
$whatever =~ /thingiem/;
Thinks the 'm/' is the beginning of a match and colorizes it, messing
Sean wrote:
Frank Mehnert wrote:
I'm using joe for many purposes. The only feature I miss is syntax
highlighting in C. Are there any hints for such a small and fast editor in
Debian with that feature built in?
VIM
Does VIM include color syntax highlighting on the console? I skimmed
Tuesday, May 23, 2000, 2:23:00 PM, Viktor wrote:
Does VIM include color syntax highlighting on the console? I skimmed
over the VIM-HOWTO, but I could only manage to get color syntax
highlighting in gvim.
Yes, it does.
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink,
Wednesday, May 24, 2000, 1:27:53 PM, Keith wrote:
One downside of vim that I just remembered, be careful the need for
slamming the ESC key. Windows likes to think it means shut this window
NOW!
and if you have the confirmation turned off you lose messages in your Windows
email client.
Keith G. Murphy wrote:
The problem I see in 5.3 is less subtle.
It will mess up this:
$whatever =~ /thingiem/;
Thinks the 'm/' is the beginning of a match and colorizes it, messing up
subsequent lines as well!
Doesn't happen here.
Package: vim
Version: 5.6.012-1
--
see shy jo
Use vim. It's hard to learn, but it is worse it. It's fast.
On Tue, 23 May 2000, Armin Wegner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Use vim. It's hard to learn, but it is worse it.
Interesting typo ;)
(I'm writing this as a non-native speaker, no offence intended)
--
Philip Lehman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 23 May 2000, Philip Lehman wrote:
On Tue, 23 May 2000, Armin Wegner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Use vim. It's hard to learn, but it is worse it.
Interesting typo ;)
(I'm writing this as a non-native speaker, no offence intended)
--
Philip Lehman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Vim's one of the
Richard Klinda wrote:
Hoi Frank, ALL!
Frank I'm using joe for many purposes. The only feature I miss is
Frank syntax highlighting in C. Are there any hints for such a
Frank small and fast editor in Debian with that feature built in?
fte, vim, jed (emacs ;-))
This leads to a
I may get flamed for this lol, but i've always used mcedit for perl
stuff, pretty perl colour highlighting :)
Peter.
Keith G. Murphy wrote:
Richard Klinda wrote:
Hoi Frank, ALL!
Frank I'm using joe for many purposes. The only feature I miss is
Frank syntax highlighting in C. Are
on 5/23/00 9:57 AM, Keith G. Murphy at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This leads to a question I've been interested in. I've noticed vim's
Perl syntax highlighting to be, hmmm, not always what it should be. (As
some have said, only perl can parse Perl). Any opinions on which editor
has the *best*
On 05/23/00, John S Jacobs Anderson addressed Re: Simple Text Editor with
Synatx highlighting?:
on 5/23/00 9:57 AM, Keith G. Murphy at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This leads to a question I've been interested in. I've noticed vim's
Perl syntax highlighting to be, hmmm, not always what
How about fte (fte-console or fte under x)??
Ron Rademaker
On Tue, 23 May 2000, Jesse Jacobsen wrote:
On 05/23/00, John S Jacobs Anderson addressed Re: Simple Text Editor with
Synatx highlighting?:
on 5/23/00 9:57 AM, Keith G. Murphy at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This leads to a question
On Tue, May 23, 2000 at 09:39:16AM -0500, Jesse Jacobsen wrote:
On 05/23/00, John S Jacobs Anderson addressed Re: Simple Text Editor with
Synatx highlighting?:
on 5/23/00 9:57 AM, Keith G. Murphy at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This leads to a question I've been interested in. I've noticed
Tuesday, May 23, 2000, 6:57:22 AM, Keith wrote:
This leads to a question I've been interested in. I've noticed vim's
Perl syntax highlighting to be, hmmm, not always what it should be. (As
some have said, only perl can parse Perl). Any opinions on which editor
has the *best* Perl syntax
Tuesday, May 23, 2000, 7:39:16 AM, Jesse wrote:
(X)Emacs with CPerl mode.
Even that's not, hmmm, what it should be. Cases that come to mind are
certain regular expressions and here documents. Unless I've been
using a different Perl mode in Emacs.
Not to mention I fail to see how Emacs
on 5/23/00 11:28 AM, Steve Lamb at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not to mention I fail to see how Emacs got into the discussion of Simple
Text Editor... Lisp interpreters with dillusions of OShood doesn't meet any
of those three words.
Go back and read the text you snipped. The question got
(X)Emacs with CPerl mode.
Even that's not, hmmm, what it should be. Cases that come to mind are
certain regular expressions and here documents. Unless I've been
using a different Perl mode in Emacs.
I haven't noticed any issues, but I don't make huge usage of here documents,
and I tend
Steve Lamb hat gesagt: // Steve Lamb wrote:
Vim. I've not seen a problem with its highlighting that didn't also
improve the readability of my code when I got in the habit of getting it to
colorize right. The /only/ perl construct I know of that doesn't work is
something like this:
if
Tuesday, May 23, 2000, 8:41:46 AM, John wrote:
Go back and read the text you snipped. The question got changed to text
editor with best Perl syntax highlighting, without a concomitant change in
subject line. (X)Emacs certainly qualifies, despite it's editing functions
being only a subset of
Tuesday, May 23, 2000, 10:21:36 AM, Frank wrote:
Hey, no problem here with highlighting that code snippet using
VIM - Vi IMproved 5.6 (2000 Jan 16, compiled Feb 10 2000 17:28:27)
(official wichert debian package)
Hmmm. I guess I'm just set in my ways because...
work:
[EMAIL
on 5/23/00 1:37 PM, Steve Lamb at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Right, because were are still on simple editor. Again, I fail to see how
Emacs qualifies since it isn't simple nor is it a text editor.
(Please note that I changed the subject line a couple messages back, to
remove the 'simple'.)
Tuesday, May 23, 2000, 10:46:21 AM, John wrote:
Have you perhaps never used emacs?
I have.
Saying emacs isn't a text editor is like saying that a Leatherman isn't a
pocket knife -- it may be literally true, but is extremely misleading in
fact.
Hey, don't tell me. Tell all the Emacs
on 5/23/00 1:49 PM, Steve Lamb at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tuesday, May 23, 2000, 10:46:21 AM, John wrote:
Saying emacs isn't a text editor is like saying that a Leatherman isn't a
pocket knife -- it may be literally true, but is extremely misleading in
fact.
Hey, don't tell me. Tell all
Steve Lamb wrote:
Not to mention I fail to see how Emacs got into the discussion of Simple
Text Editor... Lisp interpreters with dillusions of OShood doesn't meet any
of those three words.
Fox X I would use Nedit. Very easy to use and great highlighting. Actually,
this is
the only one I
Keith G. Murphy wrote:
This leads to a question I've been interested in. I've noticed vim's
Perl syntax highlighting to be, hmmm, not always what it should be. (As
some have said, only perl can parse Perl). Any opinions on which editor
has the *best* Perl syntax highlighting?
IMHO, vim. I
Hi,
I'm using joe for many purposes. The only feature I miss is syntax
highlighting in C. Are there any hints for such a small and fast editor in
Debian with that feature built in?
Frank
--
Frank Mehnert
## Dept. of Computer Science, Dresden University of Technology, Germany ##
## E-Mail:
Frank Mehnert wrote:
I'm using joe for many purposes. The only feature I miss is syntax
highlighting in C. Are there any hints for such a small and fast editor in
Debian with that feature built in?
VIM
On Mon, 22 May 2000, Frank Mehnert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm using joe for many purposes. The only feature I miss is syntax
highlighting in C. Are there any hints for such a small and fast
editor in Debian with that feature built in?
jed?
--
Philip Lehman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Monday, May 22, 2000, 8:36:38 AM, Frank wrote:
I'm using joe for many purposes. The only feature I miss is syntax
highlighting in C. Are there any hints for such a small and fast editor in
Debian with that feature built in?
I'd highly recommend vim. I was die-hard set against any vi or vi
Hoi Frank, ALL!
Frank I'm using joe for many purposes. The only feature I miss is
Frank syntax highlighting in C. Are there any hints for such a
Frank small and fast editor in Debian with that feature built in?
fte, vim, jed (emacs ;-))
--
ignotus
On Mon, May 22, 2000 at 08:59:56PM +0200, Richard Klinda wrote:
Hoi Frank, ALL!
Frank I'm using joe for many purposes. The only feature I miss is
Frank syntax highlighting in C. Are there any hints for such a
Frank small and fast editor in Debian with that feature built in?
fte,
38 matches
Mail list logo
