On 2021-11-07, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) <helbig@asclothestro.multivax.de> wrote:
> In article <3dc63091-9f4e-4698-9932-09bdc98e030en@googlegroups.com>, Slo
><slovuj@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Some editors use Ctrl+T to delete the next word, great, but it's awkward
>> - I need two hands for this - compared to a dedicated keypad key.

I use the EDT keypad in emacs and find it much more quicker and easier
than typing Ctrl-<this, that and the other>. :-)

>
> Right. EDT is by far the most efficient editor. And it is much more
> than just the EDT keypad.
>

How do you get EDT to show you where the starting brace in the
current section of code you are working on is (for example) ?

How do you get EDT to convert spaces to tabs in your code ?
(tabify in emacs, never checked to see if EVE can do it).

Can you do a rectangle select in EDT ?

Can you show more than one buffer on the screen at the same time
in EDT ?

Does EDT support programming language editing modes ? (I tend not to
use them, except for some special cases, but some people use them all
the time).

Simon.

--
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.

On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 2:29:04 PM UTC+13, Simon Clubley wrote:
> Does EDT support programming language editing modes ?

Or what about multi-file editing ... has it figured that out yet, I wonder?

(I don’t use the language modes either.)

In article <sm9ugt$scb$2@dont-email.me>, Simon Clubley
<clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes:

> On 2021-11-07, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) <helbig@asclothestro.multivax.de> wrote:
> > In article <3dc63091-9f4e-4698-9932-09bdc98e030en@googlegroups.com>, Slo
> ><slovuj@gmail.com> writes:
> >
> >> Some editors use Ctrl+T to delete the next word, great, but it's awkward
> >> - I need two hands for this - compared to a dedicated keypad key.
>
> I use the EDT keypad in emacs and find it much more quicker and easier
> than typing Ctrl-<this, that and the other>. :-)
>
> >
> > Right. EDT is by far the most efficient editor. And it is much more
> > than just the EDT keypad.
> >
>
> How do you get EDT to show you where the starting brace in the
> current section of code you are working on is (for example) ?
>
> How do you get EDT to convert spaces to tabs in your code ?
> (tabify in emacs, never checked to see if EVE can do it).
>
> Can you do a rectangle select in EDT ?
>
> Can you show more than one buffer on the screen at the same time
> in EDT ?
>
> Does EDT support programming language editing modes ? (I tend not to
> use them, except for some special cases, but some people use them all
> the time).

It is the most efficient, not the most powerful. :-)

On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 6:27:48 PM UTC+13, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
> It is the most efficient, not the most powerful. :-)

As in helping you to be the most productive?

In article <b6c4a416-0ccf-4518-b5fa-039d8d23f88cn@googlegroups.com>,
=?UTF-8?Q?Lawrence_D=E2=80=99Oliveiro?= <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> writes:

> On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 6:27:48 PM UTC+13, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
> > It is the most efficient, not the most powerful. :-)
>
> As in helping you to be the most productive?

Exactly.

On 2021-11-08, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) <helbig@asclothestro.multivax.de> wrote:
> In article <b6c4a416-0ccf-4518-b5fa-039d8d23f88cn@googlegroups.com>,
>=?UTF-8?Q?Lawrence_D=E2=80=99Oliveiro?= <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 6:27:48 PM UTC+13, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
>> > It is the most efficient, not the most powerful. :-)
>>
>> As in helping you to be the most productive?
>
> Exactly.
>

How exactly ?

By today's standards, EDT's limited functionality makes it the
assembly language version of editors when compared to other editors
which are fully featured editors.

EDT can't even show more than one window on the screen at the same
time. How does that make EDT the most productive editor ?

Even EVE can do that, which makes even EVE much more productive than EDT.

Simon.

--
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.

On 11/8/2021 1:25 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2021-11-08, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) <helbig@asclothestro.multivax.de> wrote:
>> In article <b6c4a416-0ccf-4518-b5fa-039d8d23f88cn@googlegroups.com>,
>> =?UTF-8?Q?Lawrence_D=E2=80=99Oliveiro?= <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> writes:
>>> On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 6:27:48 PM UTC+13, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
>>>> It is the most efficient, not the most powerful. :-)
>>>
>>> As in helping you to be the most productive?
>>
>> Exactly.
>
> How exactly ?
>
> By today's standards, EDT's limited functionality makes it the
> assembly language version of editors when compared to other editors
> which are fully featured editors.
>
> EDT can't even show more than one window on the screen at the same
> time. How does that make EDT the most productive editor ?
>
> Even EVE can do that, which makes even EVE much more productive than EDT.

EVE is mostly a super set of EDT functionality wise and EVE supports EDT
key mapping, so I don't see EDT as being more productive.

EDT probably use less memory than EVE. I suspect that EDT can do with
like 25-50 KB and EVE may require like 100-250 KB. But since memory
is bought by the GB today, then that is hardly an issue.

(note that a modern IDE requires like 256 MB - 2 GB of memory)

Arne

On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 7:53:04 AM UTC+13, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> EVE is mostly a super set of EDT functionality wise ...

Except it was never saddled with anything so clunky as a “current direction” mode ...

> (note that a modern IDE requires like 256 MB - 2 GB of memory)

top reports that my Emacs instance is currently using around 87MB of “RES”(ident) RAM. This after continuously running for about 2½ weeks.

But then, Emacs is not an IDE. IDEs limit you to using their particular build systems, while Emacs doesn’t care what build system you want to use: whatever the command is to launch a build, you can bind it to a single custom keystroke.

On 11/8/2021 1:25 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2021-11-08, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) <helbig@asclothestro.multivax.de> wrote:
>> In article <b6c4a416-0ccf-4518-b5fa-039d8d23f88cn@googlegroups.com>,
>> =?UTF-8?Q?Lawrence_D=E2=80=99Oliveiro?= <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 6:27:48 PM UTC+13, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
>>>> It is the most efficient, not the most powerful. :-)
>>>
>>> As in helping you to be the most productive?
>>
>> Exactly.
>>
>
> How exactly ?
>
> By today's standards, EDT's limited functionality makes it the
> assembly language version of editors when compared to other editors
> which are fully featured editors.
>
> EDT can't even show more than one window on the screen at the same
> time. How does that make EDT the most productive editor ?
>
> Even EVE can do that, which makes even EVE much more productive than EDT.
>
> Simon.
>

If it is all I need and use ....

Which part of that was not understood?

--
David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA 15486

On 08/11/2021 20:30, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 7:53:04 AM UTC+13, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> EVE is mostly a super set of EDT functionality wise ...
>
> Except it was never saddled with anything so clunky as a “current direction” mode ...
>
>> (note that a modern IDE requires like 256 MB - 2 GB of memory)
>
> top reports that my Emacs instance is currently using around 87MB of “RES”(ident) RAM. This after continuously running for about 2½ weeks.
>
> But then, Emacs is not an IDE. IDEs limit you to using their particular build systems, while Emacs doesn’t care what build system you want to use: whatever the command is to launch a build, you can bind it to a single custom keystroke.
>
Emacs - Eight Meg and continuously swapping

<g>

--
Chris

On 11/8/2021 3:30 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 7:53:04 AM UTC+13, Arne Vajhøj
> wrote:
>> EVE is mostly a super set of EDT functionality wise ...
>
> Except it was never saddled with anything so clunky as a “current
> direction” mode ...

????

EVE has direction.

> But then, Emacs is not an IDE. IDEs limit you to using their
> particular build systems, while Emacs doesn’t care what build system
> you want to use: whatever the command is to launch a build, you can
> bind it to a single custom keystroke.

????

Eclipse for Java supports its own build but also ant, maven and gradle.

Arne

On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 1:31:19 PM UTC+13, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 11/8/2021 3:30 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 7:53:04 AM UTC+13, Arne Vajhøj
>> wrote:
>>
>>> EVE is mostly a super set of EDT functionality wise ...
>>
>> Except it was never saddled with anything so clunky as a “current
>> direction” mode ...
>>
> ????
>
> EVE has direction.

When I used it, it did not. It had separate commands for movement in forward versus backward directions. Just like any other editor -- except EDT.

>> But then, Emacs is not an IDE. IDEs limit you to using their
>> particular build systems, while Emacs doesn’t care what build system
>> you want to use: whatever the command is to launch a build, you can
>> bind it to a single custom keystroke.
>>
> ????
>
> Eclipse for Java supports its own build but also ant, maven and gradle.

So you have a choice of a Java-based build system, a build system based on Java, or even a Java-building system for building Java programs!

What was that joke from “The Blues Brothers”, about offering both kinds of music, Country and Western?

On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 12:36:35 PM UTC+13, Chris Townley wrote:
> Emacs - Eight Meg and continuously swapping
>
> <g>

Let me guess .. early 1990s?

Trying to figure out when that would still have had enough edge to be funny, before it started to get to the point where Roy from “The IT Crowd” would be asking “Are you from the past?” ...

On 11/8/2021 8:20 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 1:31:19 PM UTC+13, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 11/8/2021 3:30 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 7:53:04 AM UTC+13, Arne Vajhøj
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> EVE is mostly a super set of EDT functionality wise ...
>>>
>>> Except it was never saddled with anything so clunky as a “current
>>> direction” mode ...
>>>
>> ????
>>
>> EVE has direction.
>
> When I used it, it did not. It had separate commands for movement in forward versus backward directions. Just like any other editor -- except EDT.

It did not have a status line with 3 items at the right where the
last one was direction?

>>> But then, Emacs is not an IDE. IDEs limit you to using their
>>> particular build systems, while Emacs doesn’t care what build system
>>> you want to use: whatever the command is to launch a build, you can
>>> bind it to a single custom keystroke.
>>>
>> ????
>>
>> Eclipse for Java supports its own build but also ant, maven and gradle.
>
> So you have a choice of a Java-based build system, a build system based on Java, or even a Java-building system for building Java programs!

If you use a Java IDE then it makes sense to support all the commonly
used build systems for Java, but not support build systems used in
other languages.

If you use Eclipse C++ it supports builtin and makefile.

If you use Eclipse Rust it supports Cargo.

If you use Eclipse Scala it supports builtin and sbt.

Arne

On 09/11/2021 01:38, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 12:36:35 PM UTC+13, Chris Townley wrote:
>> Emacs - Eight Meg and continuously swapping
>>
>> <g>
>
> Let me guess .. early 1990s?
>
> Trying to figure out when that would still have had enough edge to be funny, before it started to get to the point where Roy from “The IT Crowd” would be asking “Are you from the past?” ...
>

Late 80s

--
Chris

In article <smbq3b$o9$1@dont-email.me>, Simon Clubley
<clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes:

> >> > It is the most efficient, not the most powerful. :-)
> >>
> >> As in helping you to be the most productive?
> >
> > Exactly.
> >
>
> How exactly ?
>
> By today's standards, EDT's limited functionality makes it the
> assembly language version of editors when compared to other editors
> which are fully featured editors.
>
> EDT can't even show more than one window on the screen at the same
> time. How does that make EDT the most productive editor ?
>
> Even EVE can do that, which makes even EVE much more productive than EDT.

Even on really fast hardware, I am always annoyed with how slow the
cursor movement is with EVE. And then it reads in the whole huge file
even if I just want to edit the first few lines.

On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 12:43:01 AM UTC-5, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
> Even on really fast hardware, I am always annoyed with how slow the
> cursor movement is with EVE. And then it reads in the whole huge file
> even if I just want to edit the first few lines.

When EVE first came out, the file load at startup was a big issue when memory was scarce.
Not some much a problem anymore, and searching for a string near the end of the file is
noticeably with TPU and EDT.

On 11/9/2021 12:42 AM, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
> In article <smbq3b$o9$1@dont-email.me>, Simon Clubley
> <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes:
>>>>> It is the most efficient, not the most powerful. :-)
>>>>
>>>> As in helping you to be the most productive?
>>>
>>> Exactly.
>>>
>>
>> How exactly ?
>>
>> By today's standards, EDT's limited functionality makes it the
>> assembly language version of editors when compared to other editors
>> which are fully featured editors.
>>
>> EDT can't even show more than one window on the screen at the same
>> time. How does that make EDT the most productive editor ?
>>
>> Even EVE can do that, which makes even EVE much more productive than EDT.
>
> Even on really fast hardware, I am always annoyed with how slow the
> cursor movement is with EVE. And then it reads in the whole huge file
> even if I just want to edit the first few lines.

Yes.

But when it was loaded it was fast to go to the bottom unlike EDT
where it could take forever to.

Arne

In article <smbq3b$o9$1@dont-email.me>, Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes:
>On 2021-11-08, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) <helbig@asclothestro.multivax.de> wrote:
>> In article <b6c4a416-0ccf-4518-b5fa-039d8d23f88cn@googlegroups.com>,
>>=?UTF-8?Q?Lawrence_D=E2=80=99Oliveiro?= <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 6:27:48 PM UTC+13, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
>>> > It is the most efficient, not the most powerful. :-)
>>>
>>> As in helping you to be the most productive?
>>
>> Exactly.
>>
>
>How exactly ?
>
>By today's standards, EDT's limited functionality makes it the
>assembly language version of editors when compared to other editors
>which are fully featured editors.

Where is the list of *today's standards* for editors?

--
VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG

I speak to machines with the voice of humanity.

On 11/9/2021 9:57 AM, VAXman-@SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
> In article <smbq3b$o9$1@dont-email.me>, Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes:
>> On 2021-11-08, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) <helbig@asclothestro.multivax.de> wrote:
>>> In article <b6c4a416-0ccf-4518-b5fa-039d8d23f88cn@googlegroups.com>,
>>> =?UTF-8?Q?Lawrence_D=E2=80=99Oliveiro?= <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> writes:
>>>> On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 6:27:48 PM UTC+13, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
>>>>> It is the most efficient, not the most powerful. :-)
>>>>
>>>> As in helping you to be the most productive?
>>>
>>> Exactly.
>>
>> How exactly ?
>>
>> By today's standards, EDT's limited functionality makes it the
>> assembly language version of editors when compared to other editors
>> which are fully featured editors.
>
> Where is the list of *today's standards* for editors?

"today's standard" does not imply a formal (ANSI/ISO) standard just
some relative vague general expectations.

What is the general expectations from an editor today?

I would say:
- GUI
- standard menus with at least File, Edit and Help in the menu bar
- at least Open, Save, Save As and Exit in the File menu
- at least Copy, Cut, Paste, Search and Replace in the Edit menu
- common shortcuts CTRL/A, CTRL/C, CTRL/X and CTRL/V
- ability to mark blocks with mouse
- certain edit function available via right click
- ability to have multiple files open
- ability to show multiple buffers simultaneously
- some language specific color highlighting
- some smart indenting

If any of that is missing then I think eyebrows will be raised.

Several of these are just conventions. But it is conventions that
ensures that you can open an editor that you have never used
before and do some basic editing because the basic stuff is the
same.

Arne

On 11/9/21 10:21 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 11/9/2021 9:57 AM, VAXman-@SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
>> In article <smbq3b$o9$1@dont-email.me>, Simon Clubley
>> <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes:
>>> On 2021-11-08, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply)
>>> <helbig@asclothestro.multivax.de> wrote:
>>>> In article <b6c4a416-0ccf-4518-b5fa-039d8d23f88cn@googlegroups.com>,
>>>> =?UTF-8?Q?Lawrence_D=E2=80=99Oliveiro?= <lawrencedo99@gmail.com>
>>>> writes:
>>>>> On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 6:27:48 PM UTC+13, Phillip Helbig
>>>>> (undress to reply) wrote:
>>>>>> It is the most efficient, not the most powerful. :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> As in helping you to be the most productive?
>>>>
>>>> Exactly.
>>>
>>> How exactly ?
>>>
>>> By today's standards, EDT's limited functionality makes it the
>>> assembly language version of editors when compared to other editors
>>> which are fully featured editors.
>>
>> Where is the list of *today's standards* for editors?
>
> "today's standard" does not imply a formal (ANSI/ISO) standard just
> some relative vague general expectations.

It's called "de facto" and it has been around a lot longer than
"today".

bill

> I would say:
> - GUI
> - standard menus with at least File, Edit and Help in the menu bar
> - at least Open, Save, Save As and Exit in the File menu
> - at least Copy, Cut, Paste, Search and Replace in the Edit menu
> - common shortcuts CTRL/A, CTRL/C, CTRL/X and CTRL/V
> - ability to mark blocks with mouse
> - certain edit function available via right click
> - ability to have multiple files open
> - ability to show multiple buffers simultaneously
> - some language specific color highlighting
> - some smart indenting

For me, the most important is missing from this list:
1. Infinite UNDO!!!
2. Automation via macro creation and execution (1 or N times, of course)
3. ...

On 11/9/2021 9:57 AM, VAXman-@SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
> In article <smbq3b$o9$1@dont-email.me>, Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes:
>> On 2021-11-08, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) <helbig@asclothestro.multivax.de> wrote:
>>> In article <b6c4a416-0ccf-4518-b5fa-039d8d23f88cn@googlegroups.com>,
>>> =?UTF-8?Q?Lawrence_D=E2=80=99Oliveiro?= <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 6:27:48 PM UTC+13, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
>>>>> It is the most efficient, not the most powerful. :-)
>>>>
>>>> As in helping you to be the most productive?
>>>
>>> Exactly.
>>>
>>
>> How exactly ?
>>
>> By today's standards, EDT's limited functionality makes it the
>> assembly language version of editors when compared to other editors
>> which are fully featured editors.
>
> Where is the list of *today's standards* for editors?
>

Now Brian, you know that a standard is what Simon says it is ...

--
David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA 15486

On 11/9/2021 10:21 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 11/9/2021 9:57 AM, VAXman-@SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
>> In article <smbq3b$o9$1@dont-email.me>, Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes:
>>> On 2021-11-08, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) <helbig@asclothestro.multivax.de> wrote:
>>>> In article <b6c4a416-0ccf-4518-b5fa-039d8d23f88cn@googlegroups.com>,
>>>> =?UTF-8?Q?Lawrence_D=E2=80=99Oliveiro?= <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>> On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 6:27:48 PM UTC+13, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
>>>>>> It is the most efficient, not the most powerful. :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> As in helping you to be the most productive?
>>>>
>>>> Exactly.
>>>
>>> How exactly ?
>>>
>>> By today's standards, EDT's limited functionality makes it the
>>> assembly language version of editors when compared to other editors
>>> which are fully featured editors.
>>
>> Where is the list of *today's standards* for editors?
>
> "today's standard" does not imply a formal (ANSI/ISO) standard just
> some relative vague general expectations.
>
> What is the general expectations from an editor today?
>
> I would say:
> - GUI
> - standard menus with at least File, Edit and Help in the menu bar
> - at least Open, Save, Save As and Exit in the File menu
> - at least Copy, Cut, Paste, Search and Replace in the Edit menu
> - common shortcuts CTRL/A, CTRL/C, CTRL/X and CTRL/V
> - ability to mark blocks with mouse
> - certain edit function available via right click
> - ability to have multiple files open
> - ability to show multiple buffers simultaneously
> - some language specific color highlighting
> - some smart indenting

In other words, WEENDOZE ...

Perhaps my usage is too focused. When I think of text editor, I think of
working on programs. Basic, Macro-32, and (hawk, spit, gag) C. Maybe some DCL.

I'm sure there can be other uses and my focus is too narrow. But for what I
use EDT on VMS, it is what I listed above. Others may have different needs.

> If any of that is missing then I think eyebrows will be raised.

Not here. My eyebrows are raised because we're talking about this.

> Several of these are just conventions. But it is conventions that
> ensures that you can open an editor that you have never used
> before and do some basic editing because the basic stuff is the
> same.

Good way to make mistakes ...

--
David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA 15486

On 11/9/2021 10:57 AM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
> On 11/9/21 10:21 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 11/9/2021 9:57 AM, VAXman-@SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
>>> In article <smbq3b$o9$1@dont-email.me>, Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes:
>>>> On 2021-11-08, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) <helbig@asclothestro.multivax.de> wrote:
>>>>> In article <b6c4a416-0ccf-4518-b5fa-039d8d23f88cn@googlegroups.com>,
>>>>> =?UTF-8?Q?Lawrence_D=E2=80=99Oliveiro?= <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>>> On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 6:27:48 PM UTC+13, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
>>>>>>> It is the most efficient, not the most powerful. :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As in helping you to be the most productive?
>>>>>
>>>>> Exactly.
>>>>
>>>> How exactly ?
>>>>
>>>> By today's standards, EDT's limited functionality makes it the
>>>> assembly language version of editors when compared to other editors
>>>> which are fully featured editors.
>>>
>>> Where is the list of *today's standards* for editors?
>>
>> "today's standard" does not imply a formal (ANSI/ISO) standard just
>> some relative vague general expectations.
>
> It's called "de facto" and it has been around a lot longer than
> "today".

Is your "de facto" the same as my "de facto"? I bet not.

--
David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA 15486