[HN Gopher] Ed is the standard text editor (2014)
___________________________________________________________________
Ed is the standard text editor (2014)
Author : harporoeder
Score : 164 points
Date : 2022-07-07 13:25 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (wiki.c2.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (wiki.c2.com)
| ToddWBurgess wrote:
| I used to know a BSD kernel developer who wrote all his kernel
| code with ed
| scotty79 wrote:
| I always default to mcedit. I can't shake off being raised in
| Norton Commander in primary school.
| einzelganger wrote:
| I find ed to be the perfect program to test a new programming
| language. It demands good support for strings, regexes and data
| structures while being reasonably sized to be completed in under
| a week. I polished my C skills as I was learning it by writing
| this from scratch[1].
|
| [1] Shameless plug, here it is: https://github.com/bojle/edd
| kqr wrote:
| This could be an interesting challenge: speedrun up to full ed
| from just cat/tail/echo/head, shell redirects, and compiler of
| your choice.
| taylodl wrote:
| The last edit was in 2014? Who's worried about 2400 baud modems
| and terminals not having cursor positioning capabilities? It's
| 2022, not 1992!
|
| Is there some operating environment I'm not aware of?
| [deleted]
| sophacles wrote:
| > Is there some operating environment I'm not aware of?
|
| The answer to this question is always yes. In this case for
| example: plenty of old control devices in industrial settings
| are still operating and use this bitrate.
| daptaq wrote:
| This is a WikiWikiWeb article
| (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiWikiWeb), that has been
| running since 1995 and was frozen in 2014.
| NoGravitas wrote:
| I was perfectly happy using Emacs over a 2400 baud modem, on a
| fully-functional terminal (VT420 or Telix in DOS). But of
| course, Emacs' terminal display code is/was so heavily
| optimized as to be incomprehensible.
| workaccount21 wrote:
| ?
| Karellen wrote:
| > Ken Thompson has an automobile which he helped design. Unlike
| most automobiles, it has neither speedometer, nor gas gauge,
| nor any of the other numerous idiot lights which plague the
| modern driver. Rather, if the driver makes a mistake, a giant
| "?" lights up in the center of the dashboard. "The experienced
| driver," says Thompson, "will usually know what's wrong."
|
| -- _The Unix Hater 's Handbook_ pp. 57
| buescher wrote:
| "Note the consistent user interface and error reportage."
| kabdib wrote:
| I usually knew what I had done wrong. (Really). :-)
| ashton314 wrote:
| Not a "viitor". Not a "emacsitor". Those aren't even WORDS!!!!
| ED! ED! ED IS THE STANDARD!!! TEXT EDITOR.
| davegauer wrote:
| Exactly. I assumed this would be a link to the glorious
| document https://www.gnu.org/fun/jokes/ed-msg.html
|
| I love reading C2, but anything in reference to ed(1) besides
| "Ed, man! !man ed" is wasting my VALUABLE time. :-)
| thematrixturtle wrote:
| It's reproduced verbatim lower down in the page.
| eropple wrote:
| ed checking in, can confirm.
|
| `The standard unix text editor` has been my Slack bio as long
| as I can remember for a reason.
| djhaskin987 wrote:
| I have written several scripts -- some throwaway, some not --
| that use ed. If you know what you need to do to edit a file and
| need it automated, ed is just super handy. Here is a shell script
| that deletes all comments from a yaml file, then comments out a
| particular key: ed $file << COMMANDS
| g/^#.\*$/d /yaml_key: s/^/#/ w q
| COMMANDS
| meatmanek wrote:
| In most cases I find `sed -i` to be more convenient than using
| ed in scripts, but the paradigm is a little different.
| gnubison wrote:
| Except for when it breaks on FreeBSD or macOS. The most
| portable utility nowadays for desktop systems is ex, actually
| (because some Linux distros don't include ed).
| marcosdumay wrote:
| Well, of course, sed is not the stantard...
|
| It is still much more usable than ed. At least, it makes it
| easier to debug your script.
| gnubison wrote:
| In what way? Ed is interactive so you'd be able to act
| out your script line by line and check for mistakes,
| which seems easier to me. If you're cognizant about the
| differences between ed and ex, you could even debug with
| vi.
| jrumbut wrote:
| I finally had an occasion to write a .sed script a few weeks
| ago and it was one of the highlights of my career.
| krylon wrote:
| That's nice. I'd probably user Perl for this, but I happened to
| stumble upon Perl just in time to make sure I'd never become a
| shell wizard. Anything more complex than a couple of canned
| commands and _maybe_ a loop, and I go for Perl.
|
| One thing I do like about ed, though, is that when I run eshell
| within emacs, I can call ed from there. Since ed doesn't make
| any assumptions on the capabilities of the terminal it runs on,
| it works perfectly well in that environment, and being able use
| another editor from within my editor made me very happy for a
| couple of minutes. ;-)
| emmelaich wrote:
| `diff -e` and `patch -e` produce and consume `ed` commands
| [deleted]
| johncoltrane wrote:
| Ed doubters might find this episode of Lambda Island enlightening
| (and fun): https://lambdaisland.com/episodes/ultimate-dev-setup
| unrznbl wrote:
| I use ed for pretty much all editing. Have for a few years after
| I got tired of trying to debug emacs/org mode :) YMMV of course.
| :) And so I have learned bash/shell better because of it which I
| am thankful for.
| dang wrote:
| Related:
|
| _"Ed is the standard text editor." (1991)_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14406846 - May 2017 (8
| comments)
|
| _Ed is the standard text editor (1991)_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9936980 - July 2015 (3
| comments)
|
| Lots more:
|
| https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
| [deleted]
| PaulHoule wrote:
| I remember using an ed clone with a TRS-80 Color Computer running
| the OS/9 operating system
|
| https://www.roug.org/soren/6809/os9sysprog.html
|
| Previous to that I used the TECO editor on a PDP-11
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TECO_(text_editor)
| aatharuv wrote:
| The humorous part of this is from 1991.
|
| https://www.gnu.org/fun/jokes/ed-msg.html
| russellbeattie wrote:
| For some reason it took me years to understand the need for a
| line editor. It didn't make any sense in my head. Then one day I
| saw the famous picture of Bill and Allen as kids in front of a
| teletype [1] and it finally clicked.
|
| The way it worked was like this: As you keyed in your program,
| letter by letter, it was printed out on the paper immediately
| like a typewriter. If you ran the program and there was a
| problem, you'd just read (or re-read) the printout, find the line
| with the bug, then use a line editor to fix just that line. You
| might mark the paper with pencil to keep track of the change.
| After a while if you needed to see the latest version, you'd just
| print the whole program out, or just the lines you needed.
|
| This realization finally clued me into what was going on when I
| was 10yo and programming BASIC on a TRS-80 Color Computer. It was
| essentially simulating a teletype (which makes sense given
| BASIC's inception at Dartmouth [2]), where you would type each
| line individually, then if there was a problem, you would edit
| the program individual lines at a time. I always thought it was
| an odd until I understood how actually _using_ a teletype
| actually worked. Also explains why the command to write letters
| to the screen is called "PRINT".
|
| 1. https://www.gatesnotes.com/About-Bill-Gates/Early-Days-
| as-a-...
|
| 2. https://youtu.be/WYPNjSoDrqw
| legalcorrection wrote:
| And now autistic nerds keep using it, which is fine, but then
| insist that everyone else should learn it too, which is stupid.
| projektfu wrote:
| Yeah, a lot of people would send their work to the line printer
| at the end of the day, and then start fresh the next day with a
| pencil to sketch out what they were going to change. Then using
| ed is a no-brainer.
|
| I heard that a lot of people preferred fewer files and longer
| functions for the same reason--it was all there on the fanfold
| output and could be read at once, rather than working in 80x25
| chunks. After that mode of working was replaced by interactive
| programming at the display terminal, we started to prefer
| functions that didn't span more than 1-2 screens.
| IncRnd wrote:
| That's also why TTY is the name for abstract devices. Terminals
| are simulated teletypes.
| rbanffy wrote:
| Many BASIC interpreters worked exactly like that. On a TRS-80,
| for instance, you would type your program and, when you needed
| to edit a line, you'd use the "edit" command with a line number
| as the argument and drop into a line editor.
| aasasd wrote:
| Perhaps it's better to see for a minute how people used this kind
| of editors when they first appeared, than to keep reading about
| them for ages: https://youtu.be/b6URa-PTqfA?t=100 (BBC from '79,
| mentioning how people start working from home with the aid of
| newfangled microcomputers and network connectivity).
|
| I'm reminded most of all of the fdisk util, where the workflow is
| pretty much the same: print, modify, print, save. But also I can
| see where Vi/Vim come from, as I regularly do the same thing as
| in the vid: %s/something/something else/g and then wq.
| Joker_vD wrote:
| I am sure anyone who worked with gdb without GUI/"dual" mode is
| aware of this experience.
| aasasd wrote:
| https://www.seekpng.com/png/detail/350-3502039_-name-
| stock-p...
| atorodius wrote:
| Marvellous. Always wondered exactly how ed was useful :)
| the_biot wrote:
| That video is marvellous, when you compare it to today's
| technology and how it's used. The angsty "does it mean we'll
| all have to learn to type?", the female BASIC programmer
| working from home on her terminal with printer as a display.
| Great stuff.
| aasasd wrote:
| Yeah, I'm kinda getting into these vids from the seventies
| and eighties.
|
| "Introducing The Amazing Compact Disc, 1982"
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Tx6TYnPat8 -- "You can pick
| it up and move around, even shake, and nothing happens", yeah
| sure bud.
|
| "Introduction to Microsoft Excel, 1992"
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOO31qFmi9A
|
| "Susan Kare explains Macintosh UI ergonomics on the Computer
| Chronicles, 1984" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_q50tvbQm4
| -- the control panel is just astounding by modern standards,
| especially seeing as for me the control panel is a litmus
| test of an OS interface.
|
| Also one of my favorite music-making tutorials is the three-
| part, three-hour series 'Intro to Synthesis' from sometime in
| the early 80s: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atvtBE6t48M --
| instead of going through all the terminology in ten minutes
| and one second, the guy takes his time twiddling knobs and
| showing what each one does.
| atorodius wrote:
| The Macintosh UI one is gorgeous. Such simple systems. I
| wished our computers, or maybe just our phones, would be so
| simple and non-distracting still.
| aasasd wrote:
| https://baldphone.com
| wrycoder wrote:
| They can be, if you set them up correctly.
|
| Get an iPad, and delete all the app icons, except the
| couple you use every day, like iMail and Safari. (You can
| always access them from the Applications folder.)
|
| Turn off all the notifications. Set the desktop
| background to some non-distracting solid color. Keep your
| data in folders, don't clutter up the desktop.
|
| Use Pages to write things. Or, maybe just use write.as on
| the web, and let them handle the fiddly details like
| backup and web page hosting of your work.
|
| If you have a Linux background and just want something
| simple (but very capable when you need it), run i3 or
| Sway on Alpine.
| pluijzer wrote:
| Be sure to continue watch also the rest of the video, amazing
| spot on prediction for amongst other things working from home.
|
| Sort of wish I could work from home distraction free with a
| typewriter on my kitchen table though, instead having to be
| constantly be distracted by slack, zoom, email etc.
|
| '79 seems like a much simpler time.
| cupofpython wrote:
| 1) Mute phone
|
| 2) Turn off desktop notifications
|
| 3) Set timer
|
| 4) enjoy working in peace
|
| 5) timer goes off, check feeds for updates
|
| Repeat Steps 3, 4, 5. for timer length suggestions see:
| pomodoro
| hackbinary wrote:
| Let me simplify and fix this for you.
|
| 1) Mute phone
|
| 2) Turn off desktop notifications
|
| 4) enjoy working in peace
|
| 5) check notifications when you like
|
| 7) Live a happier and less stressful life.
| cupofpython wrote:
| 6) forget to check notifications in a reasonable amount
| of time and miss important alerts, possibly negatively
| impacting your career growth.
| vishnugupta wrote:
| whoa! What did I just see!? Could someone please explain to me
| how that telephone head set placed next to printer thing
| contraption works?
| aasasd wrote:
| I mean, modems and faxes in effect just whistle into the
| phone line. At some level of proficiency, you might be able
| to do that yourself ;)
|
| Afaik phone phreaking used a variety of whistling devices of
| different complexity: from https://slate.com/human-
| interest/2013/02/phone-phreaks-the-t...
|
| to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_box
| None4U wrote:
| The "printer thing" I believe is like a terminal that renders
| on paper instead of a CRT. The telephone is like SSH.
| mikepurvis wrote:
| http://www.columbia.edu/cu/computinghistory/couplers.html
| chasil wrote:
| In my high school, we had teletypes akin to these for FORTRAN
| classes, and actual IBM keypunch machines for COBOL.
|
| Our COBOL programs had to be submitted as a deck of cards
| wrapped with a rubber band. To ruin someone else's
| assignment, shuffle their deck and return it to the box.
| linksnapzz wrote:
| The printer thing is a teletype. Think of it as a terminal
| onscreen, but...the text actually gets printed to typewriter
| paper line by line. The phone thing is almost certainly an
| acoustic coupler for a 300-baud modem, hooked to the
| teletype. You'd dial the modem pool for the server you were
| trying to connect to, and when you heard the happy modem
| noises come through the handset, you'd slam it down on the
| two rubber cups, and your modem/terminal would do the Hayes
| AT dance, and a point-to-point data connection would be
| established. 300 baud was good for printing teletypes, as the
| mechanical printhead can only move so fast....
| snarfy wrote:
| If you use vi, you already know how to use ex.
| bombcar wrote:
| People make fun of ed, but the command line is basically ed with
| the ability to execute.
| kstenerud wrote:
| ... which is what makes the command line so clunky and
| annoying.
| omnibrain wrote:
| It is actually way more complex than that. Nowadays it doesn't
| get explained a lot anymore. Especially with every system
| coming with some fancy bash or zsh with somewhat sane defaults.
|
| But in the past you may have got just some naked Bourne Shell
| with no defaults at all.
|
| https://docstore.mik.ua/orelly/unix3/upt/ch30_14.htm explains a
| bit.
|
| They don't make books like this anymore. ;)
| dredmorbius wrote:
| _UNIX Power Tools_ defined, and largely proved the sole
| occupant, of a class of technical literature.
|
| It's the single book that more than any had me finally _grok_
| Unix. I still have my copy, first edition, two-colour
| printing (blue for "hyperlinks" to related sections).
|
| Jerry Peek is also an absolute treasure for Unix shell wisdom
| --- bash in particular though he's highly knowledgeable about
| others as well.
| nescioquid wrote:
| That's a neat way to think of it. Coming from the other
| direction, for emacs users, using the command line is like
| using the editor since the gnu readline lib offers keyboard
| navigation like emacs.
| yakubin wrote:
| Except ^W performs a completely different action. I can't
| count the number of times after switching from a terminal to
| Emacs within a couple of seconds, my muscle memory still not
| updated, I hit ^W only to discover I've just deleted 3/4 of
| the file.
| cyberbanjo wrote:
| You know, I never put it into words myself, but me too.
| Here for us and others: (global-set-key
| "\C-w" 'backward-kill-word) (global-set-key
| "\C-x\C-k" 'kill-region) (global-set-key "\C-c\C-k"
| 'kill-region) ;; https://www.reddit.com/r/emacs/comme
| nts/5jbvc3/kill_is_now_cc_ck_instead_of_cw/
| larsbrinkhoff wrote:
| There is a solution to your problem: M-x shell
| SPBS wrote:
| This enlightens me as to how people can code with ed (and why
| Ken Thompson famously said 'I don't want to see the state of
| the file when I'm editing.'). It's basically a REPL for writing
| code. Same as psql, the commands you use to view the state of
| the text (database) are different from the commands you use to
| edit the state of the text (database).
|
| Still sucks though. Even in psql I regularly drop into vim with
| \e to edit whole queries before sending them out.
| parasti wrote:
| Just keep it in your head. ed must have been a decent upgrade
| from punched cards.
| rbanffy wrote:
| As a line editor, it's pretty much editing a deck of punch
| cards.
|
| This metaphor, BTW, persists on a lot of mainframe related
| tasks where, while you see lines on a screen, the computer
| is reasoning about punch cards.
| legalcorrection wrote:
| There's no reason to use ed. It's a historical novelty at this
| point. Move on.
| Blackthorn wrote:
| LPMUD's online editor comes with a reasonable implementation of
| ed. It's actually the only way to edit files in the MUD
| environment (and as a result, how I learned ed).
| totetsu wrote:
| Wasnt there a way to change your editor in discworld? Maybe
| they use very customized lpmud
| NoGravitas wrote:
| Discworld is a very customized lpmud, though there are
| other muds also based on Discworld's core code ("driver").
| The default editor on Discworld wasn't ed, but a simpler,
| less-powerful line editor. ed was available as an option,
| though, last I checked (last time I logged in was when
| Pterry died, and then I hadn't logged in for years).
| macintux wrote:
| Ditto, learned ed and C that way. Tried again recently but
| quickly switched to editing files remotely.
| memorable wrote:
| What about sed? That thing is still useful and far more
| commonly used than ed.
| xenophonf wrote:
| It's a handy tool for scripting certain kinds of file editing
| operations. It's also good for editing files over remote
| management connections that don't implement a proper terminal
| interface. As with a lot of the Unix CLI, it may not be
| something you use frequently (or ever), but it's a godsend when
| you need it.
| Koshkin wrote:
| _ed_ is surprisingly usable (and useful, and fun to use), you
| should try it.
|
| > _no reason_
|
| This is like saying "There is no reason to use UNIX (now that
| we have Ubuntu, Gnome, and Wayland)." Personally, I tend to
| stick with the CLI for as long as it gets me where I need.
| kabdib wrote:
| I still use /bin/ed over vi. Seriously.
|
| (And then install Emacs and turn off the screen candy fluff
| they've added over the last 25-30 years).
| shakna wrote:
| patch can export to ed-scripts. So that you can bundle creation
| and editing into your builds, and installers and all sorts,
| because you can depend on ed existing.
| 0x69420 wrote:
| "oh no i reinstalled the os on my vps and now ssh has it on
| good authority (said authority is line 68) that someone is
| doing something nasty" ed .ssh/config 68d
| wq
|
| done, didnt fill my terminal with vim or emacs, didnt tab over
| to my gui editor then back again
|
| also it's a nicely "semantic"/compact/comprehensible way of
| expressing patches in things like portfiles or nix expressions:
| postPatch = '' ed Makefile <<EOF
| /^CFLAGS/s/-DFOO// /-funroll-loops/s//-ffast-math/
| /_BSD_SOURCE/s//_DEFAULT_SOURCE/ /^LDFLAGS/d
| /ranlib/s,,${pkgs.my_special_epic_ranlib}/bin/ranlib,
| wq EOF '';
|
| etc etc
|
| sure, using ed as your daily driver code editor in 2022 is
| probably stupid, but it's still useful enough that any linux
| distro that excludes it by default irritates me
| mananaysiempre wrote:
| > _oh no i reinstalled the os on my vps and now ssh has it on
| good authority (said authority is line 68) that someone is
| doing something nasty_ ssh-keygen -R $HOST
|
| IIRC the security warning actually used to suggest this
| command, but then stopped in order to discourage people from
| thoughtlessly bypassing it. (I don't like this pracrice of
| deliberate unhelpfulness--cf Chrome's "thisisunsafe" HSTS
| override--but neither do I like the results of being helpful
| in such cases. Ugh.)
|
| > also it's a nicely "semantic"/compact/comprehensible way of
| expressing patches in things like portfiles or nix
| expressions
|
| As far as I can tell, your ed script sans the wq at the end
| is a valid sed(1) script, and that is what people usually use
| for casual patching in packaging situations (although Nix
| also has substituteInPlace et al).
| fmakunbound wrote:
| > ed .ssh/config
|
| I think this is my ed use-case as well. I've noticed I need
| to "apt-get install ed" sometimes. The standard editor is not
| always standard, it seems.
| 0x69420 wrote:
| yeah, unfortunately, despite _literally being specified in
| posix_ (hell, macos bundles it)
|
| one of these days i will go around pestering distro release
| engineers to include it; after all, it's less heavyweight
| than any one of their homespun lightdm greeters
| mananaysiempre wrote:
| The set of utilities specified in POSIX is, erm, not
| entirely sensible[1]. Though POSIX is more helpful than
| most large standards I've seen, it still ends up mostly
| having partial implementations (are there _any_
| completely 2008-compliant systems, I wonder?).
|
| [1] http://www.landley.net/toybox/roadmap.html#susv4
| ogogmad wrote:
| Why not use sed?
| bitwize wrote:
| Now that Visual Studio Code has remote edit, you can do all
| that in a nice, _modern_ way :)
| w0m wrote:
| Remote Edit requires installing a node server to connect
| to. That would crash my router.
| assbuttbuttass wrote:
| I always used sed for deleting lines from .ssh/config
|
| sed -i 68d .ssh/config
|
| It was an eye-opening experience for me when I realized sed
| and ed commands are almost identical
| Tsiklon wrote:
| It is the Stream EDitor after all.
| krylon wrote:
| IIRC, it is mandated by POSIX/SUS, so even if it ends up not
| being used ever, to deliberately not include it is ...
| doesn't feel right.
| simonh wrote:
| When I started working on Sun systems back in 1991 the first
| terminal I used was an old model that didn't support all the
| cursor controls, so my only option for editing was ed. I worked
| that way for a year, so for a long time I was more comfortable in
| ed than vi. Of course on most systems nowadays ed and vi are now
| different modes of the same editor, as the article notes.
| layer8 wrote:
| https://web.archive.org/web/20140516191215/http://c2.com/cgi...
|
| I still lament that the C2 wiki switched to JS rendering.
| Rochus wrote:
| Aha, is that the reason why I only see a spinning circle? I
| remember that I still could access it last year.
| bmacho wrote:
| It tells me that This site uses features
| not available in older browsers.
| Rochus wrote:
| I also see this text, and I also don't have an old browser,
| but apparently older than the one the author uses;
| surprising that just this site depends on the latest bells
| and whistles.
| evilotto wrote:
| Every link I click on opens up a new frame in the current
| window. Can't move them around, or focus, or anything. Whatever
| js rendering it is is either a bizarre design choice, or just
| plain broken.
| marttt wrote:
| See also: Rob Pike's sam editor for Plan 9: http://sam.cat-v.org/
|
| Less commands and a language where "everything is a (huge)
| string". So its operations are not limited to lines like in ed. A
| tutorial of the command language:
| http://doc.cat-v.org/bell_labs/sam_lang_tutorial/sam_tut.pdf
|
| And Pike's introductory paper:
| http://doc.cat-v.org/plan_9/4th_edition/papers/sam/
|
| All in all, the terseness of the language can be quite addictive.
| :) http://sam.cat-v.org/cheatsheet/
| projektfu wrote:
| I was never much of an ed user but I did a lot of stuff in EDLIN
| on PC DOS 3.1. Ed seems a little more powerful and useful.
|
| With 512K of RAM on a 6MHz 80286, using an editor that fit into
| one "segment" and loaded quickly from a floppy was nice. The
| original DOS 1.0 edlin was just over 2K.
|
| Of course, we had printed manuals back then, and you could learn
| EDLIN with the manual on your lap while you typed commands.
| shadowofneptune wrote:
| I tried out programming in DOS using tools of the period, and I
| found edlin surprisingly easy to use; easier to get into than
| ed. It did have a few quirks. It uses the ASCII SUB character,
| ^Z, to separate the fields of a substitution command. That does
| eliminate escaping issues at least.
| fastaguy88 wrote:
| I hate to be that guy, but 'ed' is very unix specific. In the
| mid-1970's (and apparently as early as the 1960's according to
| Wikipedia), those of us on TOPS/10, TOPS/20 (and perhaps other
| DEC systems) were using TECO (which of course became EMACS).
| jhallenworld wrote:
| Yeah, also for PDP-8s and PDP-11s, which were very popular at
| the time.
|
| TECO-like editors are interesting to use:
|
| Unlike line editors (like ex/ed/edlin, etc.), the edit position
| can be anywhere, not just at line boundaries. But there is no
| screen, so you really need a good imagination to keep track of
| this..
|
| Also, they can edit files larger than can fit in the edit
| buffer, but not in the way this works on modern editors, where
| the editor manages everything. Instead, the editor makes one
| pass through the large file, copying it from input to output.
| You get to make changes along the way, in the part of it that
| fits in the edit buffer.
|
| TECO has a page concept to help with this: you break your large
| file into pages separated with form feeds, and there are
| commands to retrieve the next page from the input file and
| write the old page to the output file. But I've seen TECO
| clones without the page concept on early micros.
|
| Vestiges of this page concept remain in emacs to this day..
| kps wrote:
| ed is a derivative of QED, specifically Ken Thompson's versions
| for CTSS and Multics that added regular expressions.
|
| 1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QED_(text_editor)
| [deleted]
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| Have any good resources for these OSs?
| jhallenworld wrote:
| Someone used to host a TOPS-20 emulator online, but I can no
| longer find it.. (these days there should be DEC-20 in the
| web-browser).
|
| Anyway, here are some links:
|
| http://www.columbia.edu/cu/computinghistory/dec20.html
|
| https://www.livingcomputers.org/Computer-
| Collection/Online-S...
|
| TOPS-20 was really nice.
| larsbrinkhoff wrote:
| http://twenex.org/
| drivers99 wrote:
| EDLIN in MS-DOS was very similar to ed.
|
| (Here's a short third-party manual that someone wrote.
| http://www.sqrt-pi.org/boots/Done-That/Edlin-manual/p11.html )
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-07-07 23:00 UTC)