Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lite XL: A lightweight text editor written in C and Lua

lite-xl.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 151 posts

Re: Lite XL: A lightweight text editor written in C and Lua

#71

Post by HaroldPD »

vbezhenar wrote: post #26

Can someone suggest an editor for macOS with smart text algorithms to allow work on unlimited file size or line length? I need to view unlimited text, switch between encodings (including hex) and I want editor with proper algorithms, so it'll work instantly and without loading entire file in the memory. Should support search with fast regex engine. Editing would be nice too. I imagine editing as a sequence of actions…

Epsilon https://www.lugaru.com/

Comes sufficiently close to be worth testing the free trial.

I don't know the file size limit, but it handles multi-GB files.

Does not fulfil the hex requirement. Recognizes and edits binary files but is not a hex editor. The previously suggested https://hexfiend.com/ looks better for that.

Unlimited line length, and can either horizontally scroll long lines or wrap them for display purposes.

Fast regex.

Unlimited undo/redo, including search/replace.

Re: Lite XL: A lightweight text editor written in C and Lua

#72

Post by 323 »

vbezhenar wrote: post #26

Can someone suggest an editor for macOS with smart text algorithms to allow work on unlimited file size or line length? I need to view unlimited text, switch between encodings (including hex) and I want editor with proper algorithms, so it'll work instantly and without loading entire file in the memory. Should support search with fast regex engine. Editing would be nice too. I imagine editing as a sequence of actions…

UltraEdit

> UltraEdit's file handling is designed to prevent it from using all the available memory, which would stop other applications from running. What does this mean to you? UltraEdit has no real limit on file size - and can easily open, edit, and save large text files in excess of 4 GB!

https://www.ultraedit.com/support/tutorials-power-tips/ultra...

Re: Lite XL: A lightweight text editor written in C and Lua

#74

Post by einpoklum »

tmtvl wrote: post #25

Uses SDL for rendering the UI. While it makes it work cross-platform it unfortunately means it won't look like a native application. Then again, I don't think there's a C library which provides cross-platform native UI, only the Lazarus toolkit for Free Pascal and WxWidgets for C++.

So, is it actually small or is it just small on top of large libraries which do the heavy-lifting? I mean, ok, not Electron, but an Electron-based editor could also claim it was "small".

Re: Lite XL: A lightweight text editor written in C and Lua

#75

Post by einpoklum »

aethy wrote: post #66
dsr_ wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't prevent you from having a build path to create a .deb compatible with stable and making it available. In fact, that's a good way to improve your chances of getting into Debian proper.

If anyone's interested, I do have a `.deb` build here; but it's not an official one: https://github.com/adamharrison/lite-xl-simplified/releases/... And I haven't tested it super hard, and it's only the 64-bit build.

What does "enhanced" and "all-in-one" mean there?

Re: Lite XL: A lightweight text editor written in C and Lua

#76

Post by aethy »

einpoklum wrote: post #75
aethy wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If anyone's interested, I do have a `.deb` build here; but it's not an official one: https://github.com/adamharrison/lite-xl-simplified/releases/... And I haven't tested it super hard, and it's only the 64-bit build.

What does "enhanced" and "all-in-one" mean there?

"enhanced" is my branch that has a few experimental patches, a C rewrite of the tokenizer from lua; but I'd avoid it for now, as it can be slightly unstable.

"all-in-one" is my build that bundles all necessary files into the executable, so ships a completely portable, mostly statically built lite-xl as a single file.

Re: Lite XL: A lightweight text editor written in C and Lua

#77

Post by WalterBright »

kennywinker wrote: post #15
WalterBright wrote: post #12

Here's another one with a very small footprint: https://github.com/DigitalMars/med It's the one I use every day. The executable on Windows is a little over a meg. It also works on Linux and Mac.

Med appears to be a command line text editor, while this is a gui text editor... different beasts entirely.

I use this kind of editor because it works remotely over a tty interface. It's a full screen editor. The increase in utility for a graphics mode text editor is not that great for a code editor, because code is monospaced.

Re: Lite XL: A lightweight text editor written in C and Lua

#79

Post by marssaxman »

Daunk wrote: post #37

I've wanted to write a small text editor for a while - cause I feel like most editors don't fit my workflow - but I've been a bit too busy with work. I don't really care about fancy features or extensions. Let me just create "tasks" (for compiling and such) and let me execute these tasks with a single button, then let me see the output from these tasks that eventually execute some application/compiler etc. That'll le…

I built something which scratches that basic itch, though my taste differs from yours:

https://www.github.com/marssaxman/ozette.git

I've used this for both hobby projects and professional work, over the years (though I often find myself using VSCode these days).

Re: Lite XL: A lightweight text editor written in C and Lua

#80

Post by eikenberry »

WalterBright wrote: post #77
kennywinker wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Med appears to be a command line text editor, while this is a gui text editor... different beasts entirely.

I use this kind of editor because it works remotely over a tty interface. It's a full screen editor. The increase in utility for a graphics mode text editor is not that great for a code editor, because code is monospaced.

I don't think they were claiming that GUI editors are better... more that they have different audiences and comparing them doesn't work well due to that.
Post reply on HN