[Info-vax] Editors, was: Re: VT keyboard replacement

[alanfe...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:39:07 PM UTC-5, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2021-11-17, alanfe... at gmail.com <alanfe... at gmail.com> wrote: 
> > 
> > Can your favorite editor let you define keys without compiling a huge 
> > section file? Can you easily look up what any given key combo does? Esp. 
> > when done by learn mode? Just asking. 
> >
> I have already answered your first question (answer is yes) and posted 
> EVE examples for you to try. 

I just scanned this entire thread for your posts and do not see either of the above. 
Please re-post. 

> 
> Someone else has already answered your second question. I don't know if 
> that includes learn sequences, but I have _never_ needed to see the learn 
> sequence that I have just entered as I don't care about it after the end 
> of the current session. 

I couldn't find this one, either. Please post the answer. But the answer appears to be "no".

> 
> BTW, EVE isn't my favourite editor. It's just that its a lot more powerful 
> and productive to use on VMS than trying to use EDT. 

Depends on your tasks and whether you keep getting "Compile aborted on line 1" when you make a change dozens of lines down. I had to struggle to get EVE to work at all every time I wanted to use it at a remote lab. That is not what I would call productive! But EDT always worked no matter where I was. It's like Stereo Review (or some other stereo mag) once said: you can always tell the difference between the sound quality of a working amp vs. that of a broken one! EVE was always a pain at remote labs just to get it to run at all. THAT IS NOT WHAT I WOULD CALL PRODUCTIVE!!! And we weren't writing applications, though I did write a FORTRAN program to analyze logical combinations of hits on our detectors. And it's the only non-trivial program I wrote that worked on first compile! Unfortunately I don't have a copy of it. I think the key was to repeatedly scan two lists: the wait (?) list and the done list. Or something like that. I do remember that there were two lists that were key to the program.

Yes, some people use editors for purposes other than writing sophisticated apps. Please take note.

Hey! vi is more productive on many Unix systems (and Linux?), as it is the only one guaranteed to actually be on the box. You can't be productive with an editor that isn't there!!!  (~_^)

Emacs is an even more 
> powerful editor however.

Lovely. You are welcome to use emacs. I'm not stopping you. I'm not forcing you to use EDT either. \relax

I'm beginning to get the impression you don't think much of EDT. (!)  (~_^)

> Simon. 
> [...]

AEF