Microsoft's Edit on Windows is a New Command-Line Text Editor (theverge.com)
- Reference: 0177646163
- News link: https://developers.slashdot.org/story/25/05/19/1853221/microsofts-edit-on-windows-is-a-new-command-line-text-editor
- Source link: https://www.theverge.com/news/669318/microsoft-edit-on-windows-command-line-text-editor
Accessible by typing "edit" in a command prompt, the lightweight editor (less than 250KB) includes features like multiple file support via ctrl + P shortcuts, find and replace functionality, and regular expression support. "What motivated us to build Edit was the need for a default CLI text editor in 64-bit versions of Windows," said Christopher Nguyen, product manager of Windows Terminal, noting that 32-bit Windows versions already ship with MS-DOS Edit.
Microsoft also wanted to avoid the notorious "how do I exit vim?" problem by creating a modeless editor, The Verge writes. The tool will be available to Windows Insiders in the coming months.
[1] https://devblogs.microsoft.com/commandline/edit-is-now-open-source/
[2] https://www.theverge.com/news/669318/microsoft-edit-on-windows-command-line-text-editor
old, new, again (Score:2)
> The open-source tool allows developers to edit files directly in the command line without switching to another app, similar to vim but designed to be more user-friendly.
So you mean, like... edit? Of yore? No mention of it being a reintroduction of a concept gone by?
> the lightweight editor (less than 250KB) includes features like multiple file support via ctrl + P shortcuts, find and replace functionality, and regular expression support.
That sounds unusually competent, and with usefully welcome features.
> "What motivated us to build Edit was the need for a default CLI text editor in 64-bit versions of Windows," said Christopher Nguyen, product manager of Windows Terminal, noting that 32-bit Windows versions already ship with MS-DOS Edit.
Yeah, if you guys had done 16 bit support in NTVDM as is available in an OSS replacement for same, you coulda used MS-DOS edit...
> Microsoft also wanted to avoid the notorious "how do I exit vim?" problem by creating a modeless editor, The Verge writes.
You could easily solve it by making the mode clear on the status line, and how to get out of it too, but no need for it to be mode-based anyway.
Shoulda brought back TECO instead (Score:3)
Make America TECO again
Re: (Score:2)
Naah. [1]Gotta be the mighty ed FTW. [gnu.org]
[1] https://www.gnu.org/fun/jokes/ed-msg.en.html
How exciting (Score:2, Insightful)
As far as I'm concerned they might as well resurrect edlin. I won't be using it.
edlin (Score:2)
What no edlin? DOS line editing from way back.
Re: edlin (Score:2)
Probably written in assembly, and no one left after MS to port it to x64.
Re: (Score:3)
Source code (MIT license) [1]available here [github.com].
[1] https://github.com/microsoft/MS-DOS/blob/main/v2.0/source/EDLIN.ASM
Msdos editor remix (Score:1)
We have come full circle, msdos old edit.com with it's basic TUI is now the latest windows feature ...
Written in Rust (Score:3)
This editor is written in Rust, wonder why they don't mention that? Looks decent. I would use it instead of Nano for console work on Debian, therefore I look forward to the Linux fork.
Re: (Score:2)
Looks like the source code plus Linux and Windows binaries for ARM64 and x86-64 are [1]. [github.com]
[1] https://github.com/microsoft/edit/releases/tag/v1.0.0
Re: (Score:2)
> This editor is written in Rust, wonder why they don't mention that?
because who fucking cares what it's written in?
Re: (Score:2)
>> This editor is written in Rust, wonder why they don't mention that?
> because who fucking cares what it's written in?
TBH, it got my attention. I didn't check out the github page until I saw this info about Rust, so thanks, Tough Love!
Re: (Score:2)
Pathetic.
Re: (Score:2)
I used Joe because I already knew WordStar. I use nano because everyone told me to, and I learned it on an hour, maybe less.
The comment about users asking 'how do I exit vim???' says it all. Vim is clever, multifaceted, and overkill for casual text editing. I have avoided it and ed because they are not work the trouble, to me, to learn them.
And when you excoriate me for not investing the time to loan such an incredible tool, consider that I just wanted bolt together text, I did not want to learn to weld dis
looks like they resurrected the DOS editor (Score:2)
I used to use the edit.com executable to modify text files including autoexec and config.sys as well as batch files back in the DOS days. This is nothing new, just putting and .com file back in the distribution. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS-DOS_Editor
Re: (Score:2)
The old edit is a 16-bit DOS program. Doesn't run on a 64-bit version of Windows.
Re: (Score:2)
It was also handy for converting text docs that didn't use the windows CRLF EOL sequence to something notepad could display correctly. Edit (which had no issue with the unix style EOLs) would convert it replace the EOLs with CRLFs automatically when you opened then saved the file. Notepad took until 2018 before it could finally handle them.
Marketing working overtime. (Score:2)
"What should we call our new editor?"
"How about 'Edit?'"
"Didn't we have an editor called 'Edit' already?"
Everybody glares. "Shut up, old timer. Nobody asked you."
Re: (Score:2)
> ... Double-press the Windows key once more...
Alternatively, at that point you can single-press the Windows key twice.
Sooo, 30 years late to the game? Good old MS... (Score:2)
Must be some intern's project and they have desperately run out of ideas...
Re: (Score:2)
Have problems with Calc? Use this one:
[1]https://www.moffsoft.com/freec... [moffsoft.com]
I've been using this as a calc replacement for years.
[1] https://www.moffsoft.com/freecalc.htm
Re: (Score:3)
I just downloaded the new Microsoft edit from Github, and tried it. There just two files (edit.exe and edit.pdb). Copy them into a folder. You can now run. No installer needed.
So, fully portable. Shouldn't need admin rights, and won't need the Microsoft Store.
Re: (Score:2)
Also have [1]this option [winaero.com].
[1] https://winaero.com/get-calculator-from-windows-8-and-windows-7-in-windows-10/
Two Words.... (Score:3)
start notepad++
Re: (Score:2)
+1
Re: (Score:2)
I always add the npp="C:\Program Files\Notepad++\notepad++.exe" "$1" macro to windows so I can edit from the command line by just typing npp readme.md
More MS baloney (Score:2)
Typical MS bullshit. "similar to vim but designed to be more user-friendly". Which is to say, they have duplicated some of the simplest functionality of vim, and omitted anything which is the least bit difficult to implement. Guaranteed it won't handle regular expressions completely and correctly.
"more user-friendly" means once you have read through 1000 pages of descriptive text you have a chance of being able to use this piece of shit, but even so it won't do what you need it to.
Re: (Score:2)
As a big fan of pico/nano, I have to disagree. Complicated editors like vim or emacs have their place, but there are a lot of things they aren't good for. Drop a new user into vim and they'll be completely lost. They'll have no idea how to do almost anything including, yes, exit the editor. Nothing works like any other editor they've ever used. Drop a new user into nano and they just start typing. It works exactly how they expect it to, and the available commands are shown right at the bottom of the s
So this is a Windows answer to 'nano' editor? (Score:2)
A non-modal text editor? Only took ~40 years eh?
Vim is already available for Windows (Score:3, Insightful)
[1]https://www.vim.org/download.p... [vim.org]
It's been around for a long time, it's well tested, it does a whole lot of stuff and thousands (or millions) of people use it every day.
Why re-invent the wheel?
Not-Invented-Here Syndrome?
[1] https://www.vim.org/download.php
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly, or why not port EDIT?
I have tough time thinking anyone on Windows really wants something *new*.
If you are developer you are probably using using something a little more feature complete than anything we'd call an 'editor'
If you are sysadmin you might actually really want something you could use in an SSH terminal to make quick updates and changes on a remote box, but if you're an experienced windows Admin you probably are familiar with Edit, or you have already solved your problem with something el
Re: Vim is already available for Windows (Score:2)
they.already answered that in first link
Why build another CLI editor?
What motivated us to build Edit was the need for a default CLI text editor in 64-bit versions of Windows. 32-bit versions of Windows ship with the MS-DOS Edit or, but 64-bit versions do not have a CLI editor installed inbox. From there, we narrowed down our optionsâ¦
Many of you are probably familiar with the âoeHow do I exit vim?â meme. While it is relatively simple to learn the magic exit incantation, itâ(TM)s cer
Re: (Score:2)
No that offers no explanation as to why they did not do a port of the old 16-bit Edit to 64 bit. Which to me would make a whole lot more sense because much of the audience for a command line editor on Windows is going to be familiar with DOS's Edit.
Re: (Score:3)
Why not port edlin? It's already more sophisticated than /., for example you can type éãSä®å and it'll be handled correctly.
Re: (Score:2)
I'll agree the entire thing would have been rewritten, mostly because it is probably using DOS primitives that don't exist on 64 bit windows for disk access and it probably has calls to read things like the INDOS a thru it to make sure it does not step on something a TSR is doing.
That does not explain why they would not replicated the UI, which I think the certainly should have because as CLI text editors go, its a decent example, and again it is what long time users expect.
Re: (Score:2)
> That does not explain why they would not replicated the UI, which I think the certainly should have because as CLI text editors go, its a decent example, and again it is what long time users expect.
You may have answered your own question. Replicating a "decent example" of a UI, thereby providing "what long time users expect", seems horribly out of fashion these days. Providing those things might cost some programmer his or her job!
Re: (Score:1)
Perhaps a nit pick but you're wrong on both counts here.
The edit program wasn't "stripped out of" Quickbasic IDE (or anything else, really).
DOS edit is built into qbasic (not quickbasic) and it's not a stand-alone program.
You can get to it by typing "edit" at the dos command line, or by typing "qbasic /edit" at the dos command line. They both do the same thing.
Re: (Score:2)
> they.already answered that in first link
You actually RTFA? What's wrong with you!
Re: (Score:3)
vim.tiny (hah!): 725732b
joe: 463188b
nano: 119332b
I'd rather have joe, but nano is 1/2 of Microsoft's footprint.
Re: (Score:2)
Next up: An emacs clone ... done badly!
Re: (Score:2)
An emacs clone ... done badly!
Like emacs?