good free PCB software

J

Jan Panteltje

Jan 1, 1970
0
emacs has an entire usenet client (gnus) written it its scripting language,
(some sort of LISP) also a couple of games (incl eliza and tetris)


having a good text editor is handy

Bye.
Jasen

Emacs is useless for me.
I use 'joe', it starts up in milliseconds.
It is a full screen editor, and perfect fro programing.
Emacs is bloat.
Emacs is bloat
Emacs is BLOAT
repeat
And I do not like or underdstand the key sequences.
 
C

Chuck Harris

Jan 1, 1970
0
Jan said:
Emacs is useless for me.
I use 'joe', it starts up in milliseconds.
It is a full screen editor, and perfect fro programing.
Emacs is bloat.
Emacs is bloat
Emacs is BLOAT
repeat
And I do not like or underdstand the key sequences.

Like joe's (vi) key sequences make sense ;-)

The damage I have done in vi to a document when I forget I have toggled
into command mode, and start typing text furiously defies discussion
on a polite forum!

-Chuck
 
D

David Brown

Jan 1, 1970
0
EMACS is often described as more like an operating system that happens to
use a text editor as its "desktop." Of that 30MB, for the average person
editing a text file, probably something under 300kB is being "exercised."

emacs has been used along with the linux kernel (and a very small "init")
to provide a complete system, including a shell, file utilities, network
utilities, games, programming system, and editing.
 
J

Jan Panteltje

Jan 1, 1970
0
emacs has been used along with the linux kernel (and a very small "init")
to provide a complete system, including a shell, file utilities, network
utilities, games, programming system, and editing.

A bit like MS windows, but that ran on MSDOS.
B L O A T
 
C

Chuck Harris

Jan 1, 1970
0
Jan said:
A bit like MS windows, but that ran on MSDOS.
B L O A T

No, it would be hard to say that emacs is like Windows... emacs never
crashes.

-Chuck
 
J

jasen

Jan 1, 1970
0
Jan Panteltje wrote:

no argument there... it has been said that emacs makes xwindows look
like a small package...
,
Like joe's (vi) key sequences make sense ;-)

joe has emacs and wordstar bindings too.
The damage I have done in vi to a document when I forget I have toggled
into command mode, and start typing text furiously defies discussion
on a polite forum!

I use jed (another small programmable editor),
It's seemingly bottomless undo feature has come in handy
on occasion. I've yet to program it (in S-lang) , but have
used the regex find-n-replace to convert hex dumps, or javascript, to c

Bye.
Jasen
 
I

Ian Bell

Jan 1, 1970
0
Chuck said:
No, it would be hard to say that emacs is like Windows... emacs never
crashes.

Actually it would be quite easy to say that EMACS is like windows. In their
early days, both had security holes as wide as a barn door.

Ian
 
C

Chuck Harris

Jan 1, 1970
0
Ian said:
Actually it would be quite easy to say that EMACS is like windows. In their
early days, both had security holes as wide as a barn door.

In their later days, one still does.

-Chuck
 
J

joseph2k

Jan 1, 1970
0
Mike said:
Apparently a great deal of code is devoted to handling images and
fonts for different languages. That might take some space, but it's
still difficult to see how that could add up to 30 megs.

The basic idea of extensibility is the key advantage. Here is a 1981
paper by Richard Stallman, describing the design of the original
Emacs:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
EMACS is a real-time display editor which can be extended by the
user while it is running.

Extensibility means that the user can add new editing commands or
change old ones to fit his editing needs, while he is editing.
EMACS is written in a modular fashion, composed of many separate
and independent functions. The user extends EMACS by adding or
replacing functions, writing their definitions in the same
language that was used to write the original EMACS system. We will
explain below why this is the only method of extension which is
practical in use: others are theoretically equally good but
discourage use, or discourage nontrivial use.

Extensibility makes EMACS more flexible than any other editor.
Users are not limited by the decisions made by the EMACS
implementors. What we decide is not worth while to add, the user
can provide for himself. He can just as easily provide his own
alternative to a feature if he does not like the way it works in
the standard system.

A coherent set of new and redefined functions can be bound into a
library so that the user can load them together conveniently.
Libraries enable users to publish and share their extensions,
which then become effectively part of the basic system. By this
route, many people can contribute to the development of the
system, for the most part without interfering with each other.
This has led the EMACS system to become more powerful than any
previous editor.

http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/emacs-paper.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sprint is also an extensible editor that runs in DOS. You can write
your own macros and make it do whatever you want. You can exchange
macros with other users and take advantage of the time they spent
debugging their code.

This is much better than editors with canned instructions that you
cannot change.

Regards,

Mike Monett

Antiviral, Antibacterial Silver Solution:
http://silversol.freewebpage.org/index.htm
SPICE Analysis of Crystal Oscillators:
http://silversol.freewebpage.org/spice/xtal/clapp.htm
Noise-Rejecting Wideband Sampler:
http://www3.sympatico.ca/add.automation/sampler/intro.htm

While you have your favorite editor, others do also. In the 'nix world vi
is an acceptable editor for small tasks. In DOS land my favorite is
Multi-Edit, extensible, reconfigurable with several pre-written libraries
included. Just another in a handful of DOS macro editors for programmers.
The macro capable editor for Borland's DOS Turbo Pascal and DOS Turbo C was
very good as well.
Wordstar for DOS was a clone of an existing 'nix text editor.
EAMCS also has tools for preparing 'nix man files, and TEX typesetter files
for math, chemistry, physics, engineering, and others.
 
J

joseph2k

Jan 1, 1970
0
Ales said:
Yes, as DJ points out, some specifics would be nice.

* Which of the "geda" program(s) did you try?
* Which version?
* What platform/OS did you run it on?
* What was wrong with it?

This information would better help us understand why "the interface
is plain horrible and unproductive". The interface takes a little
time to get used to, but once you are familiar with it, the interface
is quite unintrusive.

It seems kind of silly, odd, and rather unproductive to post a short
negative quib and then not respond for more info requests. Especially
since constructive bug/usability reports are taken seriously by myself
and the other gEDA developers.

-Ales

Glad to find a maintainer. I just tried to install geda-install-20060907 on
my Suse 9.2 system from a fresh CD i just burned. From the log window the
base packages (gtk/gdk, glib, pkgconfig) and gnucap seem to be the only
things that successfully installed. There was a lot of errors in the log
window. Does it leave a log file behind if it is invoked without the --log
option? As install does take some time i would rather look for an existing
log rather than re-run ./installer.
 
S

Stuart Brorson

Jan 1, 1970
0
: Does it leave a log file behind if it is invoked without the --log
: option?

Yes, if you run the installer with the --log flag set, then it drops a
file called Install.log into your local directory. That means that
you should run the installer from a writable directory, like your home
directory, like this:

cd ~
/media/cdrom/installer --log

Don't run it as root. Also if you don't want it to install the
prerequisite system files, then just look at the Install.log file,
gather a list of dependencies, and install them yourself by hand
before re-running the installer.

Stuart
 
Top