151–160 of 337 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> rewrite This is not a rewrite. Maybe it’s slightly inspired by the old thing, especially with having GUI-style clickable menus (something not seen often in terminal editors), but it’s much more modern.
I still see it as rewrite even if you only use the original as inspiration. But that's just semantics
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> rewrite This is not a rewrite. Maybe it’s slightly inspired by the old thing, especially with having GUI-style clickable menus (something not seen often in terminal editors), but it’s much more modern.
I still see it as rewrite even if you only use the original as inspiration. But that's just semantics
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is... this a meaningful benchmark? Who's editing files big enough to benefit from 120GBps throughput in any meaningful way on the regular using an interactive editor rather than just pushing it through a script/tool/throwing it into ETL depending on the size and nature of the data?
For a text editor, yes, absolutely. As developers, we rotinely need to work with large data sets, may it be gigabytes of logs, csv data, sql dump or what have you. Not being able to open and edit those files means you cant do your job.
It'd be nice if they didn't recommend winget for installation though. winget is an egregious security risk that Microsoft has just like pretended follows even minimal security practices, despite just launching four years ago with no protection from bad actors whatsoever and then never implementing any improvements since.
winget is just Windows developers' version of curl | bash . Yet another example of Microsoft copying Linux features.
irm | iex
About a month ago I heard Microsoft had their own Linux distribution to help Microsoft Windows users feel more at home. From memory, it was a rather simple GNOME setup. Nothing special. I am surprised Micrsooft didnt use the opportunity to create a micrsoft specific Linux distro that replaces bash with powershell, or Edit with vim, nano and other choices as well as .NET and Visual Studio Code by developer installs. M…
The last one didn’t do so hot, they named it “Xenix”
Fun. I must admit I don't really know who this is for , but it seems fun.
It's for people that want to use the Windows Terminal to edit files. The old `edit` command has been unsupported on Windows since 2006, so there was no Microsoft-provided editor that could be used in the command line since then. It's impressive to see how fast this editor is. https://github.com/microsoft/edit/pull/408 > By writing SIMD routines specific to newline seeking, we can bump that up [to 125GB/s]
No musl binary. For glibc Linux distributions only perhaps.
Nano is completely ok for this. Nope, let's burn some cash and reinvent the wheel. Instead of donating to Nano devs, or hire some of them or something. Stupid corp at their finest.
msedit's key-bindings are based on IBM CUA. It's immediately familiar to a great many people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
TIL PowerShell exists for Linux. But.. why?
Well why not? Is there supposed to be a single elected shell for Linux? Powershell on Linux is just one of plenty others.
I just wonder what was the reason to port it and then I would like to have a word with a real living person who is actually using that shell.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Telling people to use nano would of course have been next to impossible. Much easier to rewrite a DOS-era editor in Rust, naturally.
> rewrite This is not a rewrite. Maybe it’s slightly inspired by the old thing, especially with having GUI-style clickable menus (something not seen often in terminal editors), but it’s much more modern.
CUA-style menubars aren't that uncommon in textmode editors. Midnight Commander's editor has traditional menubars with much more extensive functionality, as does jedsoft.org's Jed editor. Both of these also support mouse input on the TTY console via GPM, not just within a graphical terminal.