[HN Gopher] Microsoft Edit
___________________________________________________________________
Microsoft Edit
Author : ethanpil
Score : 460 points
Date : 2025-06-25 00:07 UTC (22 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (github.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
| anyfoo wrote:
| Fun. I must admit I don't really know who this is _for_ , but it
| seems fun.
| DrJokepu wrote:
| It's right there in the readme actually:
|
| > The goal is to provide an accessible editor that even users
| largely unfamiliar with terminals can easily use.
| scblock wrote:
| That may be the written goal, but I doubt that's the actual
| reason the project exists.
| cosignal wrote:
| Yeah ... I don't think there's any overlap between "users
| largely unfamiliar with terminals" who want something easy
| to use, and 'Linux users who are sufficiently technical
| that they would even hear about this repo'.
| cAtte_ wrote:
| well the editor was obviously designed primarily for
| Windows, not sure why the title says Linux
| zamadatix wrote:
| The title is a bit confusing depending how you read it.
| Edit isn't "for" Linux any more than PowerShell was made
| for Linux to displace bash, zsh, fish, and so on. Both
| are just also available with binaries "for" Linux.
|
| The previous HN posts which linked to the blog post
| explaining the tool's background and reason for existing
| on Windows cover it all a lot better than a random title
| pointing to the repo.
| egorfine wrote:
| TIL PowerShell exists for Linux.
|
| But.. why?
| skc wrote:
| Well why not?
|
| Is there supposed to be a single elected shell for Linux?
| Powershell on Linux is just one of plenty others.
| egorfine wrote:
| I'm not against it. Absolutely go for it.
|
| 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.
| MattSteelblade wrote:
| I believe this was the original announcement
| https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/powershell-is-
| open-so.... I have used it on Linux and it is included by
| default in Kali and ParrotOS.
| WorldMaker wrote:
| PowerShell lends itself really well to writing cross-
| platform shell scripts that run the same everywhere you
| can boot up PowerShell 7+. It's origins in .NET scripting
| mean that some higher-level idioms were already common in
| PowerShell script writing even before cross-platform
| existed, for instance using `$pathINeed = Join-Path
| $basePath ../sub-folder-name` will handle path separators
| smartly rather than just trying to string math it.
|
| It's object-oriented approach is nice to work with and
| provides some nice tools that contrast well with the Unix
| "everything is text" tooling approach. Anything with a
| JSON output, for instance, is really lovely to work with
| `ConvertFrom-Json` as PowerShell objects. (Similar to
| what you can do with `jq`, but "shell native".) Similarly
| with `ConvertTo-Json` for anything that takes JSON input,
| you can build complex PowerShell object structures and
| then easily pass them as JSON. (I also sometimes use
| `ConvertTo-Json` for REPL debugging.)
|
| It's also nice that shell script parameter/argument
| parsing is standardized in PowerShell. I think it makes
| it easier to start new scripts from scratch. There's a
| lot of bashisms you can copy and paste to start a bash
| script, but PowerShell gives you a lot of power out of
| the box including auto-shorthands and basic usage
| documentation "for free" with its built-in parameter
| binding support.
| trelane wrote:
| Well, _parts_ of it do, anyway.
|
| As with .net, it is not intended to let you easily get
| _away_ from Microsoft.
|
| https://learn.microsoft.com/en-
| us/powershell/scripting/whats...
| kevin_thibedeau wrote:
| There's no shortage of less technical people using nano
| for editing on Linux servers. Something even more
| approachable than that would have a user base.
| mikepurvis wrote:
| Especially noting it's a single binary that's just 222kb
| on x86_64-- that's an excellent candidate to become an
| "installed by default" thing on base systems. Vim and
| emacs are both far too large for that, and even vim-tiny
| is 1.3MB, while being considerably more hostile to a non-
| technical user than even vim is.
|
| I can definitely see msedit having a useful place.
| hulitu wrote:
| Midnight commander comes with mcedit.
| paulfharrison wrote:
| Here's a scenario. You're running a cluster, and your
| users are biologists producing large datasets. They need
| to run some very specific command line software to
| assemble genomes. They need to edit SLURM scripts over
| SSH. This is all far outside their comfort zone. You need
| to point them at a text editor, which one do you choose?
|
| I've met biologists who enjoy the challenge of vim, but
| they are rare. nano does the job, but it's fugly. micro
| is a bit better, and my current recommendation. They are
| not perfect experiences out of the box. If Microsoft can
| make that out of the box experience better, something
| they are very good at, then more power to them. If you
| don't like Microsoft, make something similar.
| hulitu wrote:
| > You need to point them at a text editor, which one do
| you choose?
|
| mcedit ?
| 0points wrote:
| > You're running a cluster, and your users are biologists
| producing large datasets. They need to run some very
| specific command line software to assemble genomes. They
| need to edit SLURM scripts over SSH. This is all far
| outside their comfort zone. You need to point them at a
| text editor, which one do you choose?
|
| Wrongly phrased scenario. If you are running this cluster
| for the biologists, you should build a front end for them
| to "edit SLURM scripts", or you may find yourself looking
| for a new job.
|
| > A Bioinformatics Engineer develops software,
| algorithms, and databases to analyze biological data.
|
| You're an engineer, so why don't you engineer a solution?
| rtpg wrote:
| I dunno, I spent a lot of years (in high school at least)
| using Linux but being pretty overwhelmed by using
| something like vim (and having nobody around to point me
| to nano).
|
| EDIT.COM, on the other hand... nice and straightforward
| in my book
| 0points wrote:
| It's a windows 11 terminal editor. Don't get confused by
| the fact that it also works on Linux.
| joseda-hg wrote:
| I dunno, I use edit since I've heard of it instead of
| figuring out why my vim config breaks on windows
|
| I might use nano via wsl (Or at that point just nvim),
| but that also has it quirks
|
| It occupies the same space as micro did for me, but it's
| / it will be preinstalled so it's better (Also a reason I
| even cared for vi at first)
| justsomehnguy wrote:
| My guess would be there are some people at MS who, somehow,
| still can do something fun. Because they are not assigned
| on the another project on how to make OOBE even more
| miserable.
|
| /rant Today I spent 3 (three) hours trying to setup a new
| MSI AIO with Windows Pro. Because even though it's would be
| joined to the local ADDS and managed from there - I _need_
| to join some Internet connected network, setup a 3 stupid
| recovery questions which would make NIST blush and wait
| another 30 minutes for a forced update download which I
| cannot skip. Oh, something went wrong - let 's repeat the
| process 3 times.
| xeonmc wrote:
| Perhaps those are the things that doesn't take a Ph.D to
| develop.
| Gormo wrote:
| There are already plenty of those, such as jed, mcedit, etc.
|
| This particular application is incredibly basic -- much more
| limited than even EDIT for DOS.
| cool_beanz wrote:
| Nano gang
| iknowstuff wrote:
| I'll gladly replace vim with it, especially if it has/gets LSP
| support or searching via ripgrep. I'm using Helix now but like
| a good tui.
| tim-- wrote:
| 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]
| _verandaguy wrote:
| 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?
| tomrod wrote:
| Challenge. Accepted.
| anyfoo wrote:
| Not on the regular, but there are definitely times I load
| positively gigantic files in emacs for various reasons. In
| those times, emacs asks me if I want to enable "literal"
| mode. Don't think I'd do it in EDIT, though.
| WD-42 wrote:
| Who cares? It's fun. Programming can be fun.
| anyfoo wrote:
| To turn this around, you can have fun _and_ ask if
| something is meaningful or not outside the fun at the
| same time. If it is, great. If it 's not, no harm.
| _verandaguy wrote:
| I'm not saying that doing this can't be fun, or even good
| to learn off of, but when it's touted as a feature or a
| spec, I do have to ask if it's a legitimate point.
|
| If you build the world's widest bike, that's cool, and
| I'm happy you had fun doing it, but it's probably not the
| most useful optimization goal for a bike.
| WD-42 wrote:
| Not a great analogy. This editor is really fast. Speed is
| important, to a point. But having more of it isn't going
| to hurt anything. It is super fun to write fast code
| though.
| legends2k wrote:
| I don't think a sentence in a big report page is counted
| as touting.
| tim-- wrote:
| As a specific benchmark, no. But that wasn't the point of
| linking to the PR. Although the command looks like a basic
| editor, it is surprisingly featureful.
|
| Fuzzy search, regular expression find & replace.
|
| I wonder how much work is going to continue going into the
| new command? Will it get syntax highlighting (someone has
| already forked it and added Python syntax highlighting:
| https://github.com/gurneesh9/scriptly) and language server
| support? :)
| _verandaguy wrote:
| Right, _these_ are more useful features, IMO, than the
| ability to rip through 125GB of data every second. I can
| live without that, but syntax highlighting 's a critical
| feature, and for some languages LSP support is a _really
| big_ nice-to-have. I think both of those are, in this day
| and age, really legitimate first-class /built-in
| features. So are fuzzy searching and PCRE find&replace.
|
| Add on a well-built plugin API, and this will be
| nominally competitive with the likes of vim and emacs.
| tiagod wrote:
| I have to scroll through huge files quite frequently, and
| that's the reason I have Sublime Text installed, as it
| deals with them very well.
| orthoxerox wrote:
| I have FAR installed for the same reason.
| magicalhippo wrote:
| At work we have to modify some 500 MB XML's every now and
| then, as the source messes them up in non-repeating ways
| occasionally.
|
| Typically we just hand edit them. Actually been pleasantly
| surprised at how well VS Code handles it, very snappy.
| pprnm wrote:
| I use the CudaText for big files. It is like open source
| Sublime.
| 0points wrote:
| 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.
| Geezus_42 wrote:
| But are you really trying to do that on a Windows Server?
| I feel like there are better tools for the job.
| delfinom wrote:
| "Better tools for the job" isn't always "the tool
| currently bringing in the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$". So you live
| with it.
|
| Sure, maybe by switching to linux you can squeeze out an
| extra CPU core's worth of performance after you fire your
| entire staff and replace them with Linux experienced
| developers, and then rewrite everything to work on Linux.
|
| Or, live with it and make money money money money.
| trelane wrote:
| > make money money money money.
|
| Subject, of course, to Microsoft allowing you to continue
| to use their software.
| _verandaguy wrote:
| I work exclusively outside of the windows ecosystem, so
| my usual go to would be to pipe this through some
| filtering tools in the CLI _long_ before I crack them
| open with an editor.
| trelane wrote:
| You could make an argument for emacs, but probably not
| using emacs as a pure text editor.
| cerved wrote:
| Probably more like _need_ to use it. Basically nano for
| windows
| axpvms wrote:
| That's pretty handy. I was having to use bash -c "vi
| myfile.txt" which was a bit annoying.
| jcotton42 wrote:
| If you were doing that to invoke WSL, note that these days
| you can do `wsl command arg arg arg...`
| kgwxd wrote:
| It's a huge improvement over notepad
| z3ratul163071 wrote:
| this is for me, as saner replacement for nano in the terminal,
| since i hate vi.
| orsenthil wrote:
| So much excitement that this got posted 3 times in a week
|
| 1. By the author - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44034961
| 2. Ubuntu Publication -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44306892
|
| And this post.
| johannes1234321 wrote:
| There is also this:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44341462
| pxc wrote:
| I used to recommend micro[1] to people like those in the target
| audience of this editor. I wonder if that should change or not.
|
| --
|
| 1: https://micro-editor.github.io/
| seabrookmx wrote:
| IMO it should not.
|
| `edit` doesn't even support syntax highlighting (atleast, out
| of the box when I tried it).
| Litruv wrote:
| I think you missed the point of edit.
| bapak wrote:
| I think not. Edit is to edit files in the terminal. What
| kind of files do you expect people to edit in the terminal?
| Most certainly files that would benefit from colors, not
| prose.
| shakna wrote:
| A lot of authors, myself included, want a "distraction
| free" editor. Its a whole over-populated market segment.
|
| Prose thrives in the terminal. Ice and Fire was written
| in WordStar, as just one popular example.
| antonvs wrote:
| Is _that_ why the series ground to a halt
| red_admiral wrote:
| Rachel Kroll once posted that she writes her posts in
| nano, with the distraction of syntax highlighting turned
| off: https://rachelbythebay.com/w/2011/09/24/editor/
|
| I can't find the link but I think at some point she
| compiled her own nano with some "helpful" feature patched
| out again.
| kristopolous wrote:
| I met someone recently that still uses WordStar. Yes I'm
| serious. He runs it in QEMU on FreeDOS. He's a writer for
| a living.
| 4k93n2 wrote:
| George R.R. Martin still uses Wordstar as well!
| legends2k wrote:
| Sure, there are always exceptions but they're only that,
| exceptions.
| seabrookmx wrote:
| I think you missed the question I was answering in my
| comment.
| JdeBP wrote:
| There's an underlying assumption about "target audience
| for this editor" that you both share, that others, I
| suspect quite a few others, do not.
|
| For starters, there's your assumption that there is
| "syntax" to be highlighted. Not every text file is
| something written in a computer programming language.
| seabrookmx wrote:
| You're right, I do assume most (90+%? of) people that are
| looking for a terminal editor are likely developers.
|
| In fact I'd put money on it, but sadly do not have any
| evidence to back it up.
|
| If you have evidence to the contrary I'd be intrigued!
| _flux wrote:
| It might in the future, though, as the main developer has
| opened an issue about it:
| https://github.com/microsoft/edit/issues/18
|
| The trick is doing it while keeping the binary size small, so
| tree sitter is not an option.
| ComputerGuru wrote:
| Vim (and so many other editors, too) supported syntax
| highlighting for decades before TreeSitter even existed.
| Let's not act as if this is a novel challenge.
| prmoustache wrote:
| Last time I checked, micro should have been called macro based
| on the binary file size.
| 3836293648 wrote:
| Well, it is orders of magnitude larger than nano, so...
| sime2009 wrote:
| Seriously? We're going to complain about a couple megs in a
| text editor in the year 2025?
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| Yes, couldn't use on my router because of its size. No
| reason for a TUI to be so big. Advanced features outside of
| syntax highlighting not useful. Should have a light
| version.
|
| I installed nano with CUA keybindings instead.
| prmoustache wrote:
| Like my mother say. Small stream makes huge rivers.
|
| Not caring about a couple of megs here and there is what
| makes some modern systems so bloated.
| pxc wrote:
| Isn't the relatively large binary just because it's written
| in Golang? Go executables each ship their own copy of the Go
| runtime. That alone accounts for a big chunk of small
| programs like this.
|
| Nano also links against ncurses, which is about as big as the
| compressed tarball for micro. I'm looking at the dependency
| closures of each right now in nix-tree[1], and micro's
| closure's total size is 15.04 MiB while nano's is 12.78 MiB--
| not really "orders of magnitude" (as a sibling commenter
| suggests) when you look at it like that.
|
| Admittedly, nano's dependencies (`file` and `ncurses`, on my
| system) are likely to ship as part of the "base system" of
| any Linux distro anyway; the real size it adds to any distro
| is negligible. But there's no indication to me that micro is
| meaningfully "bloated", as the meme goes; it seems like what
| is required to run it is reasonable and comparable to other
| tools that serve the same purpose.
|
| --
|
| 1: See: https://github.com/utdemir/nix-tree ; Try `nix run
| nixpkgs#nix-tree -- $(nix build --no-link --json nixpkgs#nano
| | jq -r .[0].outputs.out)`
| prmoustache wrote:
| The reason may help understand why but it is not really
| interesting from the point of view of the user or those
| packaging it with their OS.
| smartmic wrote:
| There is also dte[1]. It hits exactly the same notch and offers
| an extremely lean editor with Unicode support, CUA key bindings
| and much more. It has replaced nano as my terminal editor.
|
| [1]: https://craigbarnes.gitlab.io/dte/
| sneak wrote:
| Why are you opposed to learning vi which is already installed
| everywhere?
| 4ggr0 wrote:
| as someone who uses CLI text editors frequently, but not
| often enough to build the muscle memory which remembers VI
| shortcuts, i really appreciate simple text editors.
|
| i know that i can press like 3-4 arbitrary buttons to mark
| a block to move it to a different place - how about i just
| mark it with my cursor and CTRL-X CTRL-V, like every
| freaking other program out there.
|
| i appreciate that i got VI on freshly installed or secured
| servers, but for things i use daily, i just want it to be
| KISS. already counting on people answering 'but vim is easy
| and simple'. opinions differ i guess.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9n1dtmzqnCU
| IshKebab wrote:
| Because vi has all the usability of a keyboard made out of
| hedgehogs.
| s1mplicissimus wrote:
| I wouldn't consider vi usability to be overall bad. Sure,
| affordance ("is it easy grasp which moves i can make
| without affording much cognitive effort?") is terrible.
|
| Setting up a decent environment is also a huge pain to
| get started with, but nowadays you can just hop into a
| prewarmed pool with premade setups like Normalvim or
| LunarVim.
|
| But usability is not just "is it easy to learn", it's
| also "once i know it, how hard is it to use"
|
| Once the moves are ingrained in your (muscle-)memory it
| becomes so incredibly efficient. di{, dat, yaf etc. are
| just the low hanging fruit, once you start with regex,
| macros and plugins the fun really begins.
| sneak wrote:
| vi isn't usable. it sucks. but the facts are it's
| installed everywhere and you can learn how to use it in
| 10-15 minutes. easier to patch your ignorance of basic vi
| than it is to install software on every machine you'll
| ever edit on.
| smartmic wrote:
| I learned vi a long time ago and use it when no other
| editor is at hand. In fact, I am using several editors
| simultaneously, depending on the task at hand and what is
| availabe. I stumbled over dte because I like to try out new
| things. And because dte hits many sweet spots for me, I
| installed it on machines where I often need a terminal
| editor. Binding myself to only one tool just because I
| learned to use it at some point in time is not my
| philosophy. Thankfully, the open source world offers so
| many alternatives and innovations, so that there is
| something for almost all tastes and habits. It comes with
| no costs besides building muscle memory to switch as needed
| and wanted.
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| Learning CUA once is more realistic/convenient for most
| people.
| pxc wrote:
| I like vim a lot, and I use vim-style bindings wherever I
| can.
|
| But before I learned to ride a bike, I used training
| wheels, and before I learned enough vim to _enjoy_ using
| vim, I leaned on nano.
|
| When someone is first learning to explore GNU/Linux, or
| even to dig into the Unix guts of macOS, they're learning a
| _whole new world_ , not just a new text editor. For some
| people, strategic bridges to what they know (like CUA or
| Windows-like shortcuts) can make this process more fun and
| less fatiguing. Sometimes that difference is decisive in
| keeping someone motivated to learn and explore more.
|
| Anyway, I think vim is worth learning (and maybe some of
| the quirks of old-school vi, if you expect to work on old
| or strange systems). It's not a matter of _if_ I recommend
| that someone learn vim, but _when_. And until it 's time
| for them to explore an editor deeply, micro seems like a
| great fit for most people.
|
| I also want to say: as enthusiasts of Unix-like operating
| systems, or as professionals who appreciate some of their
| enduring strengths, should we really embrace a "because
| it's there" doctrine? Isn't that same kind of thinking
| responsible for huge, frustrating piles of mediocrity that
| we work with every day and resent?
|
| ss someone who loves an ecosystem built first by volunteers
| as "just a hobby, nothing big and serious", I will it's
| sad, if not hypocritical, to dismiss software projects just
| because they aren't already dominant players. Most software
| I love was once marginal, something its users went to
| lengths to install on the systems they used because they
| enjoyed it more than the defaults. We should, to the extent
| practical, try to leave a little room for that in the way
| we approach computing-- even as we get older and grumpier.
| JdeBP wrote:
| You realize that you're asking this in a discussion of a
| tool that is intended to be installed out of the box on
| Microsoft Windows, where vi _is not_ installed out of the
| box, right? Your "everywhere" doesn't include the primary
| use case for what is being headlined here.
| whou wrote:
| I'd recommend everyone to take a look and read some of dte's
| source code. It's a great example of beautifully written
| modern C code.
| mattbee wrote:
| And you can get it on Windows with just "winget install
| zyedidia.micro". Reminds me of 8 & 16-bit editors of a similar
| era.
| jksmith wrote:
| This is just a "because I wanted to" project. And I get that;
| done a lot of those myself just to understand what the hell was
| going on. But the rewrite of turbo vision into FPC and compiling
| to half a dozen targets has been around for 20 years. Turbo
| vision is probably the best text mode windowing library in
| existence. The cool fun kicks in when you can map a whole text
| screen to an array like so: var Screen: Array[1..80,1..25] Of
| Byte Absolute $B800; // or something like that as i recall
|
| What turbo vision brought to the game was movable, (non) modal
| windows. Basically a lot of rewriting that array in a loop.
| Pretty snappy. I made a shitload of money with that library.
| throwaway127482 wrote:
| I am curious about how you made money with it, if you don't
| mind sharing.
| jksmith wrote:
| My first company out of uni was a company that sold a tv
| advertising application written in dos. It did all the
| reports, put together spot advert packages, measuring reach
| and frequency, cost per point, etc. Used Neilsen ratings for
| data. The company at the time paid commissions along with
| salary to programmers. The app still lives on in windows, but
| I've been out of that game for decades. Written in TP for
| dos, then Delphi for windows.
| TheAmazingRace wrote:
| Honestly dude, this is clever. Good on you for finding an
| opportunity to make a useful tool and you made out like a
| bandit in the process. :)
| jksmith wrote:
| That was the toolchain that my company used. Turbo vision
| was a Borland product, back when Philippe Khan was
| running the company. We were that ahead of the curve for
| "shrinkwrapped software development" at the time. That
| legacy, Delphi and FPC still maintain the standard for
| desktop, native dev, really for the last 30 years.
| esafak wrote:
| Kahn is still pretty active: https://philippekahn.com/
| velcrovan wrote:
| I skimmed the blog. I detect LLM output, but no person.
| natebc wrote:
| I think we're going to have to get used to feeling like
| this. Makes me sad a little.
| rollcat wrote:
| The broadcast industry continues to move at a slow pace
| compared to IT, and understandably - it's live TV, you
| need things to work 24/7/365.
|
| That means there's always an opportunity for the
| resourceful.
| dleslie wrote:
| For those curious, here is a modern port of the C++ Turbo
| Vision that also supports Unicode:
|
| https://github.com/magiblot/tvision
| san1927 wrote:
| lmao is any body still using turbo cpp?
| srvmshr wrote:
| You'll be surprised if I tell you several universities in
| India have not updated their curriculum in a very long time
| & Turbo C++ (& its non-standard C++ flavor) is the weapon
| of choice. The school board in the '00s, which preferred to
| teach a programming language for CS, used to have it
| curriculum around this C++ dialect. I have passed my high-
| school board examinations with this language (It was known
| to be already outdated in 2004. The smart kids knew the
| real C++ was programming by Visual Studio 6 ecosystem. But
| one had to still deal with it to clear the exams.)
|
| Admitted, a few things have changed in last couple of
| years. MATLAB is being replaced by Python. Teaching 8085 &
| 8051 is being replaced by RasPi/Arduino. 8086 is taught
| alongside ARM & RISC, and not touted as SoTA.
|
| I last saw Turbo being used in 2016-17 in a university
| setting, inside a DosBox (because Windows 7+ have dropped
| support for such old programs). Insane, but true.
| zozbot234 wrote:
| Nice. This editor could see a lot of use in such places
| if it gains developer-oriented features such as LSP, DAP
| and tree-sitter parsers. As a Rust-written editor, it
| will probably be quite a bit easier on resources than the
| usual modern choices which generally involve VSCode or
| Jetbeans plus language-specific plugins.
| ashoeafoot wrote:
| embrace. extend. deadend.
| Arnavion wrote:
| Yeah, I also learned C++ via Turbo C++ in school in India
| in the early 2000s. Googling for "conio.h" shows Indians
| still talking about it in blogs and C/C++ forums as of
| 2024.
| ethbr1 wrote:
| > _You 'll be surprised if I tell you several
| universities in India have not updated their curriculum
| in a very long time_
|
| I once asked an Indian colleague why Indians use US/UK-
| nonstandard English like "kindly", "do the needful", and
| "revert".
|
| He thought about it a minute, then said "Oh, the texts
| everyone uses to learn English say that proper letters
| must always begin with 'Kindly,'".
|
| Sokath, his eyes uncovered.
| keyle wrote:
| I wish I was.
| dleslie wrote:
| OpenWatcom is the preferred choice of those still writing
| DOS applications, but there are those that still use Turbo
| C++ for the nostalgia.
| iforgotpassword wrote:
| Oh, a few years ago I wanted to write a simple program
| for dos. Since this is a Linux-only household otherwise,
| I was delighted to see OpenWatcom has a Linux port. I
| spent a good half hour trying to get a simple first
| version of the program I wanted to write running, but it
| always crashed right away. I simplified more and more
| until I basically arrived at hello world. On a hunch I
| ran the windows version of OpenWatcom with wine, and lo
| and behold, the program ran flawlessly! Once I googled
| that I found a couple of forum threads where people went
| like "yeah sure the Linux port produces broken binaries"
| because of course.
|
| It's never the compiler until it's the compiler. Just
| didn't expect it during some simple fun coding at home.
| :)
| nazgulsenpai wrote:
| Core memory unlocked... When I was ~10-12, I asked my dad
| (who knew nothing but thought he knew everything about
| computers) how to make programs for Windows because I
| couldn't in QBasic. His answer was "with C++!". He came
| home with a book Learn C++ In 24 Hours that had Turbo C++
| on a single 3.5" floppy disk. Naturally, that did not work,
| but I still had fun failing to compile every program I
| attempted to write.
| electroly wrote:
| Every time I see a new modern TUI framework, my disappointment
| is the same: "Oh. This isn't as good as Turbo Vision."
| wenc wrote:
| Turbo Vision was truly immersive. I used it in Turbo C and
| also in Paradox 4.5.
|
| So good.
| ByteDrifter wrote:
| Funny how something that ran in a tiny box on a 386 could
| feel more responsive than some modern GUIs. Turbo Vision
| really nailed the basics.
| kgwxd wrote:
| I swear the characters appear on the screen before I
| press the keys when I'm in a real (not emulated) Linux
| terminal. I can't feel the lag as I'm typing this comment
| into a basic textarea, but it's clearly there, because a
| terminal feels magical.
| no_wizard wrote:
| I always thought Charm was pretty robust as far as TUI tools
| go[0]
|
| [0]: https://charm.sh/
| nathell wrote:
| array[1..25, 1..80] of Word absolute $B800:0000.
|
| Arrays in TP were laid out in row-major order, and each
| character was represented by two bytes, one denoting the
| character itself and the other the attributes
| (foreground/background color and blinking). So, even better,
| array[1..25, 1..80] of packed record ch: char; attr: byte end
| absolute $B800:0000.
|
| Replace $B800 with $B000 for monochrome text display (mode 7),
| e.g., on the Hercules.
| TiredOfLife wrote:
| > This is just a "because I wanted to" project.
|
| It's not. They needed a small TUI editor that was bundled with
| Windows and worked over ssh.
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44034961
| macjohnmcc wrote:
| I'd love for an interface like that on VSCode that runs in a
| terminal even remotely.
| ocdtrekkie wrote:
| 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.
| easton wrote:
| disclaimer: I used to commit to winget a lot and now I don't.
|
| ...but is it really less secure than brew or choco? The
| installers are coming from reasonably trusted sources and are
| scanned for malware by MS, a community contributor has to
| approve the manifest changes, and the manifests themselves
| can't contain arbitrary code outside of the linked executable.
| Feels about as good as you can get without requiring the ISVs
| themselves to maintain repos.
| ocdtrekkie wrote:
| The installers are coming from random people on the Internet.
| Most software repositories have trusted contributors and a
| policy of requiring a piece of software be arguably worthy of
| inclusion. Perhaps because Microsoft is afraid to pick
| winners, every piece of garbage is allowed on winget, and
| there's no way to restrict who can make changes to what
| packages.
|
| There are ISVs that would like to lock down their software so
| they can maintain it but a trillion dollar company couldn't
| spare a dollar to figure out a "business process" to do this.
| As far as I know, Microsoft has a single employee involved
| who has laughed off any security concerns with "well the
| automated malware scanner would find it".
|
| The "community contributors" were just... people active on
| GitHub when they launched it. Was anyone vetted in any way?
| No.
|
| The Microsoft Store has actual app reviewers, winget has...
| "eh, lgtm".
| 90s_dev wrote:
| The policy of including the author's name next to the
| project name, along with some indication that it really is
| the author and not an imposter, I think that's probably the
| best we're ever going to get, since at that point it just
| comes down to community trust.
| dale_huevo wrote:
| winget is just Windows developers' version of _curl | bash_.
| Yet another example of Microsoft copying Linux features.
| ocdtrekkie wrote:
| Except curl | bash definitely executes code by the author
| controlling the URL you put in, and if the URL is HTTPS, in a
| reasonably secure fashion.
|
| There is no validation when you winget whether or not the
| executable is from the official source or that a third party
| contributor didn't tamper with how it's maintained.
| dale_huevo wrote:
| If you think HTTPS is performing code validation I have
| news for you.
|
| HTTPS only guarantees the packets containing the unverified
| malicious code are not tampered with from the server to
| you. A server which could very well be compromised and
| alternate code put in its place.
|
| You are drawing an egregious apples-to-oranges comparison
| here. Please re-read what you said.
|
| You could serve _digitally signed code_ over plain HTTP and
| it would be more secure than your example over HTTPS.
| Unfortunately there are a lot of HTTPS old wives ' tales
| that many misinformed developers believe in.
| tim-- wrote:
| > in a reasonably secure fashion
|
| It's trivial for a remote server to hand two different
| versions of a script with the traditional `curl | bash`
| pipeline. https://lukespademan.com/blog/the-dangers-of-
| curlbash/
|
| There is 0 validation that the script that you are piping
| into bash is the script that you expect. Even just
| validating the command by copying and pasting the URL in a
| browser -- or using curl and piping into more/less is not
| enough to protect you.
| ToValueFunfetti wrote:
| The parent is talking about MITM, which is prevented with
| TLS and curl but not winget. They are saying curl is
| strictly better, not that it is impenetrable. If you
| trust the domain owner, you can trust curl | bash, but
| you can't trust winget
| tim-- wrote:
| Why can't I trust winget?
|
| It's not hard to run the `show` command to see what a
| winget install will do. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-
| us/windows/package-manager/wi...
|
| It's easy enough to view the manifests (eg,
| https://github.com/microsoft/winget-
| pkgs/blob/2ecf2187ea0bf1...) and arguably, is better then
| the protection for MITM that you would get using naked
| cURL & Bash, simply because there are file hashes for all
| of the installer files provided by a third party.
|
| > They are saying curl is strictly better, not that it is
| impenetrable
|
| Right. But it arguably is not strictly better.
|
| > You can't trust winget
|
| Again, this is not backed up by anything. I have trust in
| winget. I can trust that the manifest has at least been
| vetted by a human, and that the application that will be
| installed should be the one that I requested. I can not
| trust that this will happen with curl | bash. If the
| application that is installed is not the one that I
| requested, there is tooling a process to sort out why
| that did not happen, and a way to flag it so that it
| doesn't happen to other users. I don't have this with
| curl | bash.
| bee_rider wrote:
| >> Except curl | bash definitely executes code by the
| author controlling the URL you put in, and if the URL is
| HTTPS, in a reasonably secure fashion.
|
| > It's trivial for a remote server to hand two different
| versions of a script with the traditional `curl | bash`
| pipeline.
|
| I'm confused by this; it seems to be written in the tone
| of a correction but you both seem to be saying that you
| get whatever the server sends. (?)
| tim-- wrote:
| > you both seem to be saying that you get whatever the
| server sends
|
| Yes, but I am also saying that you can't verify that the
| script that is run on one machine with a pipe is the same
| script that runs on a second machine with a pipe.
|
| The key part of the original statement is the server can
| choose to send different scripts based on different
| factors. A curl&bash script on machine 1 does not
| necessarily mean the same curl&bash script will be run on
| machine 2.
|
| The tooling provided by a `curl | bash` pipeline provides
| no security at all.
|
| With winget, there is at least tooling to be able to see
| that the same file (with the same hash) will be
| downloaded and installed.
|
| There are ways to do this better, for example, check out
| https://hashbang.sh. It includes a GPG signature that is
| verified against the install script, before it is passed
| to curl.
| dgfitz wrote:
| curl | bash is absolutely on my very short list of "things
| I'll never do" and I wince when I see it. rm -rf starting
| from / is another. I watched someone type in (as root) "rm
| -rf / home/user/folder" once. By the time I realized what
| had happened it was too late.
| TiredOfLife wrote:
| Windows already has
|
| irm <URL> | iex
| 486sx33 wrote:
| Why should "ms-edit" be avoided ?
| LAC-Tech wrote:
| Needs LSP and Tree-Sitter :)
| z3ratul163071 wrote:
| and scripting :)
| tonyedgecombe wrote:
| I'd quite like to see VSCode for the terminal.
| trinix912 wrote:
| Oh yes, it needs VBScript support ;)
| oliverkwebb wrote:
| If the editor focused on becoming an IDE instead of being
| idiot-proof and cleanly designed, what would distinguish it
| from the 1,000 other editor projects?
| jedisct1 wrote:
| Probably entirely AI-generated.
| 90s_dev wrote:
| I don't understand why they want to go with DLLs for scripting
| instead of WASM + wamr which is _really_ small. Maybe I 'm just
| really inexperienced in this space.
| vunderba wrote:
| The possibility of using WASM was _at least_ under discussion
| last month:
|
| https://github.com/microsoft/edit/issues/17
| kgwxd wrote:
| Runs on Windows too! It has "Redo", not to be confused with "Undo
| Undo". Unfixed-width Tabs are a huge leap forward. LF, sans CR,
| will cut your file sizes in half.
| pcunite wrote:
| Back in 1993, I would open up binary files in edit and enjoy
| seeing hearts.
| samplatt wrote:
| That, the DOS defrag visualisation, and the hex-editing my own
| savegames is pretty much why I'm a developer today.
| diggan wrote:
| Ah, the memory of going to bed while the 500MB harddrive
| defrags over-night, sleeping next to the endless clicking and
| spinning
| xyst wrote:
| It will take more than nostalgia and rust to tear me away from my
| neovim setup that has been built up/improved on over the years.
| Lsp, dap, autocompletion, aliases and bindings for each
| programming languages. Lazily loaded of course so it's still
| snappy.
|
| Manage configuration, and external dependencies such as lsps with
| nix.
|
| Then have separate nix shells for each project to load tooling
| and other dependencies in an isolated/repeatable session. Add in
| direnv to make it more seamless development experience.
| watusername wrote:
| You are not the target audience. This is aimed at casual users
| and beginners, and it's already in a good shape to replace nano
| with its user-friendly, mouse-enabled TUI.
| encom wrote:
| >in a good shape to replace nano
|
| ...
|
| Anyways, here's how to tell if your LED sign is cheap!
| legends2k wrote:
| Huge +1, same for me, but with GNU Emacs instead of neovim but
| can completely appreciate the philosophy.
| umeshunni wrote:
| Can this be ported to MacOS?
| watusername wrote:
| It already works? There just isn't an official build yet - just
| `cargo run` yourself.
| jll29 wrote:
| 219232 bytes binary if compiled for Apple silicon (ARM).
| stuaxo wrote:
| Its pretty easy to build there, I've tried this on MacOS and
| Linux.
|
| The one thing that vexed me for something based on edit, was
| CTRL+P being hijacked for something that isn't print, is like
| we forgot about about CUA over the last 15 years.
| dgellow wrote:
| Not an emacs user I assume?
| ioma8 wrote:
| It works on MacOs since it was published some two weeks ago. I
| have been using it since then.
| 1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote:
| No musl binary. For glibc Linux distributions only perhaps.
| rahen wrote:
| Just build it yourself. Or you can install glibc on both Void
| and Alpine, if you want the pre-built binary.
| 1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote:
| What about BSD
| fsniper wrote:
| Microsoft loves to own general terminology like "edit" for their
| products. I have no idea how this flys.
|
| SqlServer like it's the one that found sql or it's the only
| product that serves sql.
| red_admiral wrote:
| The copy command is called "copy" which kind of makes sense? I
| remember once seeing a colleagues .bashrc with things like
| "alias copy=cp". Flags won't work the same way of course.
|
| Sure "chcp" is a mouthful, but "del" or "erase" makes as much
| sense as learning that "rm" is short for remove. You pick up
| either convention quickly enough, except that I'm constantly
| using "where" when I meant "which". Maybe I should make an
| alias or something.
|
| Don't get me started on powershell's look-we-can-use-proper-
| words-lets-see-how-long-we-can-make-this.
| delfinom wrote:
| >I have no idea how this flys.
|
| They aren't trademarking it and probably can't.
|
| But there's no reason they anyone can't use generic naming for
| their products. Many software applications do and quite frankly
| its more descriptive to attracting new users than coming up
| with non-real names.
|
| I would aruge the only reason made up names exist is to keep
| marketing departments employed trying to explain to users what
| they are needlessly.
| not_a_bot_4sho wrote:
| I know what you mean but everyone does this.
|
| Apple has Pages, Numbers, Keynote, etc. Google has Drive, Docs,
| Sheets, etc. Meta has Messenger. Far too many examples to list.
|
| Conversely, it would be ridiculous to use non-obvious names.
| tempire wrote:
| fake. it's not blue.
| andrewstuart wrote:
| I love edit.
|
| It was my favorite editor back in the old days.
|
| It worked, did the basics really well and got the job done. Glad
| to see it's back.
| pulkitsh1234 wrote:
| Geniunely curious, how projects like these get approved in an org
| at the scale of Microsoft? Is this like a side project by some
| devs or part of some product roadmap? How did they convince the
| leadership to spend time on this?
| dark-star wrote:
| As they explained, they needed a text editor that works in a
| command line (for Windows Core server installs), works across
| SSH (because for a while now Windows included an SSH Server so
| you can completely manage it through SSH), and can be used by
| non-vi-experienced Windows administrators (i.e. a modeless
| editor).
| llarsson wrote:
| Telling people to use nano would of course have been next to
| impossible. Much easier to rewrite a DOS-era editor in Rust,
| naturally.
| dark-star wrote:
| does nano support mouse usage? It doesn't seem to work for
| me (but maybe it just needs to be enabled somewhere)
|
| I guess they thought that inheriting 25 years of C code was
| more trouble than designing a new editor from scratch. But
| you'd have to ask the devs why they decided to go down that
| route
| Elfener wrote:
| > does nano support mouse usage?
|
| Yes, but you have to put `set mouse` into your nanorc.
| red_admiral wrote:
| This way gets coolness points, HN headlines, makes the
| programmers who wrote it happy, and probably is a
| contribution to making a couple of autistic people feel
| included.
|
| Rust + EDITOR.COM is kind of like remaking/remastering an
| old video game.
| oersted wrote:
| micro would have been an even better choice, the UX is
| impressively close to something like Sublime Text for a
| TUI, and very comfortable for those not used to modal
| editors.
| aembleton wrote:
| This is the first time I've heard of micro. More info
| here: https://micro-editor.github.io/
| subjectsigma wrote:
| I like micro and use it occasionally. I like this even
| more. I booted up the editor and instantly thought "it
| would be nice if there was a clickable buffer list right
| about..." and then realized my mouse was hovering over
| it. My next instant thought was that micro should have
| implemented this feature a long time ago
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| It doesn't have a menu for windows devs, and is supposed
| to be small and light. Two strikes against.
| nmeofthestate wrote:
| nano's great but the shortcuts are a bit oddball, from the
| perspective of a Windows guy.
| Kwpolska wrote:
| > 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.
| dark-star wrote:
| I still see it as rewrite even if you only use the
| original as inspiration. But that's just semantics
| dmd wrote:
| If they hadn't called it "edit" you wouldn't have thought
| of it as a rewrite.
| TiredOfLife wrote:
| It's no semantics. It's just a lie
| Gormo wrote:
| It does seem "modern" in the sense that it is incredibly
| limited in functionality (EDIT.COM from DOS is much more
| full-featured) and deviates from well-established UI
| conventions.
|
| 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.
| JdeBP wrote:
| The developer actually explained, on Hacker News just over
| a month ago, some of the engineering choices that ruled out
| nano.
|
| * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44034961
| zamalek wrote:
| A text editor is an obvious target for copilot integration.
| sublimefire wrote:
| Each group needs to do something and they come up with the
| ideas. Sometimes it is driven by various leaders, e.g. "use
| copilot". Sometimes it is an idea from some hackerdayz event
| which gets expanded. Sometimes this is driven in research units
| where you have a bunch of technical people twiddling their
| thumbs. Sometimes this is an idea that goes through deep
| analysis and multiple semesters before it gets funding.
|
| Look at the amount of contributors here. This project was
| probably some strategic investment. It did not come to
| existence overnight.
| herbst wrote:
| Did anyone ask for yet another a Microsoft editor on your Linux
| machine?
| gadders wrote:
| Do Edlin next.
|
| Reminds me of my days on a support line.
|
| "Type edit autoexec.bat....." etc
| trinix912 wrote:
| And DEBUG. It's sad we no longer have a
| debugger/(dis)assembler/binary editor bundled with Windows.
| That thing was tiny but you could do so much with it.
| red_admiral wrote:
| Now I'm waiting for EDLIN but with unicode.
|
| I remember you could use it in a batch file to script some kinds
| of editing by piping the keypresses in from stdin. Sort of a
| replacement for a subset of sed or awk.
|
| I haven't tried but this should be possible with vi too. Whether
| that is deeply cursed is another question.
| gnubison wrote:
| I think ed is what you're looking for (possibly with -s).
| JdeBP wrote:
| Ironically, given the mention of vi, it is ex that is what
| red_admiral is looking for. (-:
| napolux wrote:
| oh, the memories. gorilla.bas :)
| boobsbr wrote:
| also, nibbles.bas
| homebrewer wrote:
| It can still be played in a browser:
| https://archive.org/details/GorillasQbasic
| wasimanitoba wrote:
| Meanwhile, they forced AI Copilot bloat into Notepad, whose
| singular use-case was supposed to be that it does _one_ thing
| well without unnecessary features.
| saturn5k wrote:
| I stopped using Notepad since they introduced tabs.
| dwattttt wrote:
| I recall reading Raymond Chen mentioning that Notepad actually
| gets more exercise than you'd expect; it's a common guinea pig
| for features:
| https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20180521-00/?p=98...
| pjmlp wrote:
| Unfortunately, the new Edit isn't safe from such decisions.
|
| While Satya might have made the change Microsoft <3 FOSS, the
| Gates/Balmer era was much better towards Windows developers.
|
| Now we have a schizophrenia of Web and Desktop frameworks, and
| themselves hardly use them, what used to be a comfortable VS
| wizard, or plugin, now is e.g. a CLI tool that dumps an Excel
| file, showing that newer blood has hardly any Windows
| development culture, or their upper management.
| CineSnaccs wrote:
| I don't know how many people don't know this, but now you
| actually can't release app on Windows without it showing your
| warning while installing unless you sign it with EV
| certificates, which cost upwards of 500$ for a year.
|
| As you may have guessed, this simply pushes out smaller devs.
| This used to NOT be like this. It should NOT be like this.
| wronex wrote:
| I would highly recommend looking into Azure code signing.
| It is confusing to set up. But comes with instant
| reputation and "only" costs 10$ a month.
|
| EV certificates has always felt like an utter scam and
| extortion to me. At least now there is an alternative.
| simplyinfinity wrote:
| Good. This might suck for opensource devs, but for normies
| that might get a random exe link this is good. I've gotten
| numerous phone calls from relatives when they try to run
| some unrecognized app, most of the time is benign, but on
| few occasions it was something malicious.
| conductr wrote:
| It's a heavy tax to protect the ignorant. I hear things
| like this and think how I've been using a computer for
| nearly 4 decades and it's never once happened to me.
| Maybe those types of people need to re-evaluate their
| technology choices (maybe iPad is more appropriate)
| instead of taxing the entire ecosystem to protect them
| from themselves.
| simplyinfinity wrote:
| low income countries don't have the money for iPads. My
| parents run on a 300 Euro computer bought 5 years ago. My
| dad is technical enough to get around a computer, but
| he's in his 60s now. My mom can open Facebook and
| youtube. Sometimes either of them downloads stuff, and
| opens them. So your solution is "make millions consumers
| spend $$ on overpriced hardware and even more closed off
| system, so few hundred open source devs don't spend 500$
| to verify their app (which they will have to do if they
| want to release on the iOS platform either way)" Ain't no
| way.
| dec0dedab0de wrote:
| A popup warning is not a heavy tax.
| cwyers wrote:
| If you count the number of ignorant people who use
| Windows versus the people like you, you'll quickly
| realize the tax is very cheap for the level of protection
| it offers to the number of people it offers it to.
| hulitu wrote:
| > Good. This might suck for opensource devs, but for
| normies that might get a random exe link this is good
|
| That random exe link is signed by Microsoft.
| rollcat wrote:
| Unfortunately Apple normalised it, first with the iPhone.
| There are upsides (theoretically - less trash apps), but
| the review/curation process doesn't scale, and yep - the
| small devs are effectively told to bug off.
|
| 10 years ago I wanted to build a Love2D game, and release
| it for the three major OS's. The .love files are
| effectively ZIP archives, kinda like cartridges, but you
| need the correct Love2D version (they broke API compat
| every year or so). Windows and Mac used to be: "cat
| love.exe game.zip > game.exe".
|
| Linux gave me the most crap, because making a portable,
| semi-static build was a nightmare; you couldn't rely on
| distros because each one shipped a different version of
| love.
|
| Now Linux is actually becoming more viable, not because
| it's making that much progress, but because the two
| mainstream platforms are taking steps back.
| prepend wrote:
| At least signing is free for MacOS apps. And back when I
| used it only $100/year for iPhone apps.
| c-hendricks wrote:
| ... where is signing free for macOS apps?
|
| You can use an ad-hoc signature to sign, but people who
| download the app will still have to jump through hoops to
| run it.
| throwaway290 wrote:
| Now I get why a project I work on is signed for Apple and
| not for Windows... 5x the price, jeez
| shortrounddev2 wrote:
| There are currently no ideal native app development
| frameworks on Windows. WinForms is the closest thing
| Timwi wrote:
| I'm so glad to hear that from someone unprompted. I tried
| WPF and it was a million times harder to use than WinForms,
| and I couldn't even be bothered to try out MAUI (although I
| accept it as an apology for WPF lol). I'm still using a
| WinForms application every day (Git Extensions) and have
| been able to contribute to it not least because it's the
| good old familiar WinForms.
|
| This is not to say that WinForms isn't without its
| problems. I often wonder what it could be like if all the
| effort of making WPF and MAUI had gone into maintaining,
| modernizing and improving it.
| shortrounddev2 wrote:
| I think that the native GUI development APIs provided by
| OS vendors need a kind of "headless" implementation
| first, where you can build UI in pure code like winforms,
| and then they should offer a framework on top of that. I,
| personally, hate XAML. It's stricter than HTML/CSS and
| very opinionated about how to organize your application.
| I feel that XAML frameworks should have a common
| Winforms-like API behind them that you can switch to any
| time you want. But I've found that using the C# code-
| behind APIs manually for WPF, UWP, MAUI, etc, is far more
| verbose than Winforms was.
|
| My only major problem with winforms is that it's still
| using GDI under the hood which, despite what many people
| believe, is actually still primarily software-rendered.
| If they could just swap out Winforms for Direct2D under
| the hood (or at least allow a client hint at startup to
| say "prefer Direct2D") it would really bring new life to
| Winforms, I think.
|
| I would also like a C++ native GUI API that's more modern
| than MFC
| pjmlp wrote:
| Unfortunately that is something Microsoft seems incapable
| of.
|
| MFC was already relatively bad versus OWL. Borland[0]
| kept improving it with VCL and nowadays FireMonkey.
|
| There there is Qt as well.
|
| Microsoft instead came up with ATL, and when they finally
| had something that could rival C++ Builder, with C++/CX,
| a small group managed to replace it with C++/WinRT
| because they didn't like extensions, the irony.
|
| With complete lack of respect for paying customers, as
| C++/WinRT never ever had the same Visual Studio tooling
| experience as C++/CX.
|
| Nowadays it is in maintenance, stuck in C++17, working
| just good enough for WinUI 3.0 and WinAppSDK
| implementation work, and the riot group is having fun
| with Rust's Windows bindings.
|
| So don't expect anything good coming from Microsoft in
| regards to modern C++ GUI frameworks.
|
| [0] - Yes nowadays others are at the steering wheel.
| trinix912 wrote:
| Borland was pretty good on the GUI front, I think we're
| forgetting how easy it was to get something rolling in
| Delphi. It's baffling Microsoft still hasn't gotten their
| stuff together on this. They've been just releasing new
| frameworks since the WinRT era and hoping something
| sticks.
| WorldMaker wrote:
| "C# Markup" [1] [2] sounds a lot like what you are
| looking for. As the only "second party" option in this
| space it's interesting that it is so MAUI only/MAUI
| focused, but I suppose that's the "new hotness".
|
| There have been similar F# libraries and third-party C#
| libraries for a while that seem nice to work with in
| similar ways.
|
| [1] https://learn.microsoft.com/en-
| us/windows/apps/windows-dotne...
|
| [2] https://github.com/CommunityToolkit/Maui.Markup
| pjmlp wrote:
| Agreed it is the easiest, however it is also possible to
| use WPF on the same style as Forms, with more features, no
| need to go crazy with MVVM, stay with plain code behind.
|
| Having said this, from 3rd parties, Avalonia is probably
| the best option.
|
| While I think Uno is great as well, they lose a bit by
| betting on WinUI as foundation on Windows, and that has
| been only disappointment after disappointment since Project
| Reunion.
| LordDragonfang wrote:
| We spent the better part of a calendar year researching
| what framework to update our MFC app to. We really liked
| the idea of staying first-party since our UI is explicitly
| Windows-only, and we looked at every framework - MAUI,
| winforms or WPF with a C# layer, WinUI3...
|
| It quickly became apparent that WinUI3 was the only one
| even close to viable for our use case, and we tried getting
| a basic prototype running with out legacy backend code. We
| kept running into dealbreakers we hoped would be addressed
| in the alleged future releases, like the lack of tables, or
| the baffling lack of a GUI UI designer (like every other
| previous Win framework).
|
| ...We're currently writing our GUI in Qt.
| naikrovek wrote:
| The new Edit.exe is indeed safe from those things.
|
| A requirement for the tool is that it must remain as small as
| possible, so that it can be included in the smallest
| distributions of Windows, like Nano Server. It is the rescue
| text editor there.
|
| I'm sure plugins are going to do all the things that everyone
| doesn't want (or does want) but the default edit.exe will
| remain small, I'd bet money on it.
| GardenLetter27 wrote:
| It sucks so much - my ISP had an intermittent outage (some IPv4
| / MTU issues), and I couldn't save files in Notepad without
| disabling it.
|
| I was literally trying to configure Wireguard to get around the
| ISP issues.
| masfoobar wrote:
| Thank you for this!
|
| I had to open Notepad and see it for myself. Wow! I see the
| Icon.
|
| I remember Co-pilot just suddenly appearing in my taskbar and
| finding it annoying. Despite removing it, I still see it
| lurking around... and now I see it is a SIMPLE TEXT EDITING
| PROGRAM named Notepad.
|
| Wow.
| OptionOfT wrote:
| And if you uninstall the modern notepad, start's search doesn't
| find the old one.
| MaxikCZ wrote:
| As if start's search ever found anything...
| bgro wrote:
| Every product has bizarre bloat. I understand things might get
| heavier over time with new features, but Office from like 20
| years ago still works pretty great. In fact, I don't even
| really see any new features that are missing in my normal use
| case. Actually, anything that DOES exist in a newer version is
| something I actively DO NOT want. For example, monthly/yearly
| subscriptions, popups that interrupt typing to advertise some
| new bloat, and dedicated buttons to import any file into a
| powerpoint presentation or email.
|
| Look at Outlook. Literally less than 25% of the screen appears
| to be dedicated to email content. I say literally because I
| physically measured it and from what I remember it was 18% to
| 20%. Microsoft keeps adding these gigantic toolbars that each
| have duplicate buttons that often can't really be adjusted,
| removed, or hidden. Or it may be an all-or-nothing scenario
| where something can be removed but then you can't e.g. send
| emails.
|
| Rather than fixing the problem, the solution is to add a new
| toolbar. This frequently keeps happening. Just one more toolbar
| with a select subset of buttons in one place so people can find
| it. Well now... We have some extra whitespace... Let's throw in
| the weather there and why not put the news in too. What could
| possibly go wrong?
|
| And then loading the news, some totally unrelated and non-
| critical feature they shove in forcefully by default frequently
| has at least one critical severe bug where there's an async
| fetch process that spikes the cpu to max and crashes the whole
| system. There's no way to disable news without first loading
| outlook and going into advanced settings, which of course is
| past the critical point of the news being loaded.
|
| Go look at like Outlook 2003. It is nearly perfect. It's clean,
| simple, and there's no distractions. This is so amazing, like
| many Microsoft products that seem to be built by engineers, but
| I don't know how we get to modern outlook that feels like it
| has 10 to 50 separate project manager teams bloating it up
| often with duplicate functionality.
|
| This would be bad enough, but then again instead of fixing it
| like I said before or fixing it by reducing or consolidating
| teams or product work, we get ANOTHER layer of Microsoft bloat
| by having multiple versions of the same product. So we have
| Outlook (legacy) named that way to make you feel bad for using
| an old version, or named to scare you into believing it won't
| be supported. Then there's Outlook (New). Then there's Outlook
| (Classic) which isn't legacy or new but is a weird mix of
| things. Then there's a web version that they try to force
| everybody into because it's literally perfect and there's no
| reason not to use it... Somehow they didn't catch that emails
| don't load in folders unless you click into them, or sorting
| rules don't work the same or don't support all the same
| conditions. Rather than fixing it, you get attacked for using
| edge case frivilous advanced obscure functionality. Like who
| would want to have emails pre-sorted into any folder except
| inbox? Shame on you for using email wrong I guess.
|
| I'll skip over the part where there's multiple versions of the
| multiple forks of outlook. But there's also Government,
| Education, Student, Trial, Free, Standard, Pro, Business,
| Business pro, Business premium, etc.
|
| The last infuriating point in my rant has to come down to their
| naming standards. For some reason they keep renaming something
| old to a completely new name and of all the names they could
| pick, it's not only something that already exists but it's
| another Microsoft product. This is a nightmare trying to
| explain to somebody who is only familiar or aware of either the
| old or the new name and this confusion is often mixed even on a
| technically capable and competent team. For bonus points, the
| name has to be something generic. Even like "Windows" which is
| not a great example because the operating system is so popular
| but you can imagine similarly named things causing search
| confusion. Or even imagine trying to search for the GUI box
| thing that displays files in a folder within the operating
| system, also called a window, and try to imagine debugging an
| obscure technical problem about that while getting relevant
| information.
|
| There's so many Microsoft moments that things like adding AI to
| notepad hardly phase me anymore. I don't like that they do that
| but I wouldn't necessarily be so offended if their own
| description they came up with in the first place was what you
| mentioned. Constantly going against their own information they
| invented themselves and chose to state as a core statement just
| irritates me.
| samiv wrote:
| Since you mentioned Outlook.. at work we use Outlook 2019 and
| its exactly like you mention.
|
| The user interface is littered with useless crap, the File
| menu goes back to this weird completely new different UI
| layout etc etc.
|
| And the best part is that if the VPN goes temporarily down it
| fails to send/receive new emails until it has been restarted.
|
| Let me say that again.
|
| It fails at its _core_ functionality if there 's a glitch in
| the network and cannot send or receive emails. That's just a
| next level of incompetence.
| navane wrote:
| I just googled some screenshots of outlook 2003 and I felt
| peace.
| EvanAnderson wrote:
| > The last infuriating point in my rant has to come down to
| their naming standards. For some reason they keep renaming
| something old to a completely new name and of all the names
| they could pick, it's not only something that already exists
| but it's another Microsoft product.
|
| Microsoft has seemingly sucked at naming things since at
| least the mid-90s. It's effectively un-search-engine-able,
| but I recall that in the anti-trust action in the mid-90s a
| Microsoft person was trying to answer questions about
| "Internet Explorer" versus "Explorer" (as-in "Windows
| Explorer", as in the shell UI) and it was a confusing jumble.
| Their answers kept coming back to calling things "an
| explorer". It made very little sense. Years later, and after
| much exposure to Microsoft products, it occurred to me that
| "explorer" was an early 90s Microsoft-ism for "thing that
| lets you browse thru collections of stuff" (much like
| "wizards" being step-by-step guided processes to operate a
| program).
|
| Also, playing-back my "greatest hits" comment re: Microsoft
| product naming: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40419292
| 0cf8612b2e1e wrote:
| I took a screenshot and pasted it into the new Win11 Paint.
| Even minimized, Paint was constantly using 5% CPU and sitting
| at ~250MB of RAM. I guess I can begrudgingly get over the RAM,
| but squandering the CPU like that is ridiculous.
|
| What happened to pride or quality control or anything?
| hulitu wrote:
| > What happened to pride or quality control or anything?
|
| We are talking about Microsoft here.
| dogleash wrote:
| >What happened to pride or quality control or anything?
|
| Sounds like some dangerous cowboy coding wrongthink you've
| got going on over there.
| jandrese wrote:
| I assume it is basically an Electron app now. Anything will
| be bloated when it's a full web browser running some webapp.
| contextfree wrote:
| No, it doesn't use Electron or webviews afaik. The UI is
| mostly WinUI2/UWP/XAML Islands based however
| guerrilla wrote:
| Maybe this makes up for them destroying Notepad for some people.
| nhinck3 wrote:
| Another Microsoft nerd-washing project.
| imbnwa wrote:
| 'nerd-washing' such a great term
| masfoobar wrote:
| 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.
|
| Micrsoft could have used this as their default WSL install.
|
| It may not have won the war against typical distro like Ubuntu or
| Debian but it could have gained a percentage and be a common
| choice for Windows users - and there are a lot of Windows users!
|
| Microsoft cannot dominate the Linux kernel but it can gain
| control in userland. Imagine if they gained traction with their
| applications being installed by default in popular distributions.
|
| This Microsoft Edit is available for Linux, like Powershell is
| and others. If they had played their cards right -- perhaps -- 10
| years ago, their distribution could have been in the top 5 today,
| all because many windows users use it as their WSL.
|
| Giant companies (like M$) can inject their fingerprints into my
| personal space. Now, we just need Micrsooft Edit to have Co-Pilot
| on by default...
| repler wrote:
| > I am surprised Micrsooft didnt use the opportunity to create
| a micrsoft specific Linux distro
|
| The last one didn't do so hot, they named it "Xenix"
| arexxbifs wrote:
| It was a lousy distro, it didn't even include the Linux
| kernel!
|
| On the other hand, according to AT&T, Xenix accounted for
| about half of the worldwide Unix licenses in the late 1980s.
| bdcravens wrote:
| That wasn't Linux. Unix != Linux.
| subjectsigma wrote:
| I would venture a guess that the name recognition helps them.
| No developer wants to install a distro they've never heard of,
| but they do want to install Ubuntu. If WSL supports Ubuntu then
| they can cash in on that.
| delfinom wrote:
| >Microsoft cannot dominate the Linux kernel but it can gain
| control in userland. Imagine if they gained traction with their
| applications being installed by default in popular
| distributions.
|
| Yes, but how do they make money by doing this.
|
| Unlike the socialist hiveminds that end up being behind the
| distros. Microsoft has salaries and bills to pay.
|
| As far as I've always seen, everyone loves to leech on
| Microsoft's free stuff but nobody wants to pay for a product.
| masfoobar wrote:
| I do not claim to be a business expert but I dont think their
| success comes from just their Windows Operating System. Well,
| I would say the success for Windows is not about the profit
| but the control of users. If the majority are on Windows,
| they are unlikly to change habit to what they are familar
| with.
|
| Besdies, for new PC/Laptops come bundled with Windows,
| Microsoft has made an agreement made with various retailers
| to come with Windows (Home edition) preinstalled. So in some
| ways, Windows is free for the User unless they pay for
| Professional edition, or whatever is offered today.
|
| Of course, the average user will create a microsoft account
| to complete the install. :-)
|
| Besides the Windows OS -- it is really the Services they
| provide.. Azure, Office365, SQL Server, PowerBI, etc. I would
| say THIS is where a lot of the money comes from... business
| willing to pay for them!
|
| I work for Companies that are willing to PAY for these things
| - all for "Support"
|
| If something goes wrong.. raise it with Microsoft. Even if I
| know what the problem is, it is all about the ticketing
| system. Throw it to Microsoft and carry on.
|
| Despite the above, Microsoft also have "Free" software. They
| have started to Open Source many of their software.. allowing
| Linux support as well as Windows. Visual Studio Code, SQL
| Server, Powershell, etc.
|
| It comes back to my point. When they presented WSL - they
| could have provided a "MS Linux" Distro, all promoted as
| "ease for Windows users" and if it became a popular distro,
| would have pushed micrsoft to have more control in
| userland... which would have alienated most Windows users
| away from Ubuntu, etc.
|
| Like Windows, it is a method to keeping your userbase to rely
| on what they know overall.
| martinald wrote:
| I strongly suspect in time Microsoft will move to Linux, at
| least with things like Windows Server and embedded Windows.
| Then a gradual change for Windows desktop, or a sort of Windows
| Legacy vs Windows "Linux Workstation" desktop options. Linux
| kernel + some sort of 'super' WINE and a fallback tightly
| integrated Windows classic on a VM for certain programs.
|
| Only problem is that the NT kernel in many ways is much better
| than the Linux kernel design wise (for example, the NT kernel
| can handle a total GPU driver crash and restore itself, which I
| think Linux would really struggle with - same with a lot of
| other drivers).
|
| But Windows is increasingly a liability not an asset for
| Microsoft, especially in the server space. Their main revenue
| stream is Azure & Office 365 which is growing at double digits
| still, with Windows license growth flat.
|
| At a minimum I'd expect a Linux based version of Windows Server
| and some sort of Workstation version of Windows, based on
| Linux.
| naikrovek wrote:
| > I strongly suspect in time Microsoft will move to Linux, at
| least with things like Windows Server and embedded Windows.
|
| You may not understand how important Microsoft considers
| backwards compatibility. Switching to a Linux kernel would
| eliminate all of that, and that is simply not an option for
| Microsoft.
|
| The Linux kernel is missing a lot of esoteric things that the
| NT kernel has and that people use a lot, as well.
|
| Windows as we use the word today (any variant) will not ever
| switch to a Linux kernel.
|
| I do hope one day that Microsoft put a proper GUI on Linux
| though, no X, no Wayland, but something smarter and better
| than those. Probably also not likely to happen but I'd love
| to see it if they could do it well.
| trelane wrote:
| > I do hope one day that Microsoft put a proper GUI on
| Linux though, no X, no Wayland, but something smarter and
| better than those.
|
| https://xkcd.com/927/
|
| Now that I say that, though, that _does_ sound like a
| Microsoft kind of move. They do love other platforms "to
| death."
| LionEgo wrote:
| The reason why WSL is a thing is because developers in corps
| needed a way to run Linux. IT support and techs doesn't know
| anything about Linux typically and don't want to deal with
| supporting it. WSL fixes this problem.
|
| Most developers don't want to use Linux at all. Many developers
| don't even really know how to user a terminal and rely on GUI
| tools.
| 8-prime wrote:
| > Most developers don't want to use Linux at all. I don't
| know if this is necessarily true. Many of the develops I know
| prefer GUI applications to cli tooling, which I can get
| behind. That has nothing to do with Linux vs Windows though.
| But my struggles with Windows are plentiful and the same goes
| for all my colleagues. I have a hard time believing that we
| are the outliers and not the rule.
| philistine wrote:
| > Most developers don't want to use Linux at all.
|
| (looks at the install numbers for Linux vs Windows in the
| server space) I'm not so sure.
| lpcvoid wrote:
| Sorry for the snarky comment, but then those devs are simply
| bad. Windows is legacy, the future is in open source.
| masfoobar wrote:
| > Most developers don't want to use Linux at all. Many
| developers don't even really know how to user a terminal and
| rely on GUI tools.
|
| First of all, I disagree with this comment.
|
| However, lets assume you are right.. that the average
| "Windows Developer" has little to zero skills in GNU/Linux.
|
| If that is the case, it proves my point EVEN MORE that
| Micrsofot missed out creating a Microsoft Linux Distro...
| designed to have Powershell, Visual Studio Code, Edit, and
| potentially Edge, SQL Server, etc.
|
| It would still be Linux but keeping to what they know in
| Windows -- and would have given Microsoft more power in the
| linux world.
| LionEgo wrote:
| > First of all, I disagree with this comment.
|
| You can disagree all you want. It is simply the truth. I've
| contracted in the UK and Europe. Most devs don't even know
| you can tab complete most commands in modern shells (IIRC
| cmd.exe supports this). This is both Microsoft Shops and
| shops that use opensource stacks e.g. LAMP and similar.
|
| I was in a large company in the NW and I knew two
| developers in a team of 30 that knew _basic_ bash and vim.
|
| > If that is the case, it proves my point EVEN MORE that
| Micrsofot missed out creating a Microsoft Linux Distro...
| designed to have Powershell, Visual Studio Code, Edit, and
| potentially Edge, SQL Server, etc.
|
| Respectfully you seem to have never worked with the people
| I describe. You listed PowerShell as if they would use it.
| A former colleague of mine was quizzed why he would use
| PowerShell to write a script that would run on a Windows
| Server. They had expected him to write a C# program.
| trelane wrote:
| > Many developers don't even really know how to user a
| terminal and rely on GUI tools.
|
| Fortunately, Linux users can also avail themselves of a
| graphical interface as well.
| LionEgo wrote:
| Your snark at my comments is completely unwarranted.
|
| Installing any dev tooling that is third party is done on
| the command line. Go and look up the instructions for
| installing Node LTS on Debian, or .NET, or Golang. You need
| to use the command line.
|
| I won't get into the state of Linux user interfaces. While
| some of them can look pretty basic features still work
| inconsistently and I've been using Linux for 25 years.
|
| So it is easier to learn bash, learn to read the man pages,
| because that is a consistent interface for the system.
| dfedbeef wrote:
| You think Microsoft maintains an entire secret distro just for
| Windows people to feel 'at home'.
| masfoobar wrote:
| > You think Microsoft maintains an entire secret distro just
| for Windows people to feel 'at home'.
|
| Sorry I dont understand the point you are making.
|
| I did not suggest they had a "secret distro" I am suggesting
| they could have claimed a share of dominance in the Linux
| Distro as the default WSL distro.
| Arnavion wrote:
| >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.
|
| You're confusing Microsoft's first-party Linux distro Azure
| Linux (nee CBL-Mariner) that is intended as a regular MS-
| supported OS for containers, VMs, servers, etc, with various
| Windows-like skins for Linux DEs that people have made for
| years.
| Fokamul wrote:
| 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.
| masfuerte wrote:
| Nano is a bare-bones editor with its own wacky key-bindings.
| What is the point? If I want to learn new key-bindings I'll
| learn a full-featured editor.
|
| msedit's key-bindings are based on IBM CUA. It's immediately
| familiar to a great many people.
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| Nano can be configured with CUA keybindings, I do it.
|
| But I'm glad someone wrote one of these in rust.
| cyberwaj wrote:
| story in the news already
| https://digitrendz.blog/newswire/technology/19460/microsoft-...
| amelius wrote:
| Was hoping for MS-DOS editor with built-in LLM.
| scoopr wrote:
| The original edit.com, from around dos 6.22 (and later 7.0, ie.
| win95) was my first IDE. Well, I started with qbasic, so I was
| fairly familiar with it as it was similar (or same?), but when I
| started learning C/C++ with djgpp, I just continued using
| edit.com.
|
| My "project file" was `e.bat` with `edit file1.cpp file2.cpp
| file3.cpp`, as it was one of the few editors that I knew that had
| a decent multi file support with easy switching (alt-1,2,3 ..). I
| still continue remapping editor keybindings to switch to files
| with alt/cmd-1,2,3,.. and try to have my "active set" as few of
| the first files in the editor
|
| It wasn't a great code editor, as it didn't have syntax
| highlighting, and the indent behaviour wasn't super great (which
| is why in my early career had my indent was two spaces, as that
| was easy enough to do by hand, and wasn't too much like tab). But
| I felt very immediate with the code anyway.
|
| I knew that many others used editors like `qedit`, but somehow
| they never clicked with me. The unixy editors didn't feel right
| in dos either.
|
| Quickly trying this, it doesn't seem to switch buffers with the
| same keybindings, even if it does seem to support multiple
| buffers.
| unsupp0rted wrote:
| edit was a godsend after the `copy con` days
| naikrovek wrote:
| I remember using edlin a lot in my early computing days. It
| was murder to learn but once you knew how to wield it, it was
| excellent. I don't know why I was forced to learn that but I
| needed it for something and stuck to it the entire time I
| used DOS for anything. And people were in awe when you used
| it while they watched. "What the hell was that!?"
| mysterydip wrote:
| It may not have had syntax highlighting, but it did have syntax
| capitalization (for lack of a better term?). If you typed a
| line in all lowercase, after hitting enter it would
| automatically uppercase the reserved words. It wasn't much, but
| it helped
| JdeBP wrote:
| You should raise that as an issue. If things like that get in
| early enough, they get heard.
|
| And it wasn't just similar. It was literally the same. EDIT.COM
| simply started QBASIC up with a special flag. One could just
| run QBASIC with the flag. As I said at
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44037509 , I actually did,
| just for kicks.
| ubermonkey wrote:
| I do not understand the love this project is getting. It was a
| shit editor when it was introduced; we'd all started using
| something else years before.
| riffic wrote:
| agreed. it's nostalgic sure but it's not a good editor.
| kspacewalk2 wrote:
| How long until it becomes Copilot 365 Edit?
| csense wrote:
| Fun project #1: Get the binary size comparable to EDIT.COM
|
| Fun project #2: Port to MS-DOS (with DPMI)
|
| Fun project #3: Port to 16-bit MS-DOS (runs on original 8086)
| Aldipower wrote:
| I appreciate the sense of humor coming from this project. F.ex.
| from the release note: "As Steve Ballmer famously said: Fixes!
| Fixes! Fixes!".
|
| Refreshing to see employees can have fun in a multi billion
| dollar company.
| pmarreck wrote:
| I love TUI's lately.
|
| I just wish this was on nixpkgs
| nhatcher wrote:
| So many things I like about this!
|
| First of all, an empty list of dependencies! I am sold! It works
| great. I can't believe the did a whole TUI just for this, with a
| dialogs a file browser. I want to use for a project of mine, I
| wonder how easy it is. If someone involve in the project is here,
| why not use Ratatui?
|
| Code quality is top notch, can only say one thing:
|
| Bravo!
| ashoeafoot wrote:
| If you are a idea guy and want your idea real , all you have to
| make is a fency fake trailer anouncing it, then watch the company
| create it, the suits are this empty anyone external can
| powersteer those ghostships.
| 0x0 wrote:
| I was hoping this would work over ssh in a macOS Terminal.app,
| but last I tried it was inserting all kinds of weird characters
| into the edited text files.
|
| Windows ships an official OpenSSH server these days, but so far
| there haven't been any good official text editors that work over
| OpenSSH, as far as I know.
|
| I've had to resort to "copy con output.txt" the few times I
| needed to put things into a text file over windows-opensshd...
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| Maybe using ucs2 encoding, instead of utf8?
| dbuxton wrote:
| I came here assuming that this was a clone of Gemini CLI (which
| is a clone of Claude Code). Both pleased and disappointed to be
| wrong.
| majkinetor wrote:
| I thought this might work with Enter-PSSession but it
| unfortunatelly produced Error 0x80070006: The handle is invalid.
|
| Insane that we don't have TUI in remote session in 2025.
| DSMan195276 wrote:
| Agree 100%, that's the biggest difference I feel whenever I'm
| doing remote Powershell vs. ssh, it always feels like a
| struggle just to make basic file modifications.
| bluedino wrote:
| > This editor pays homage to the classic MS-DOS Editor
|
| Oddly, it looks more like Borland's editor.
| kevin_thibedeau wrote:
| TurboVision had horizontal scrollbars. Edit never did.
| DrNosferatu wrote:
| Any Flatpak or Snap editions?
| tmaly wrote:
| Was this made just cause someone wanted to do something in Rust?
| JdeBP wrote:
| No. The developer actually chose Zig initially.
|
| * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44034961
| oliverkwebb wrote:
| It's nice to see an editor that explicitly isn't an IDE and is
| more something like notepad. often when editing config files and
| the such, it's more convenient to use something like notepad than
| it is to use something like VSCode.
|
| This editor doesn't have delusions of grandeur, it focuses on
| usability more than features. and it is better for it.
| parliament32 wrote:
| The lengths people will go just to not have to learn Vim
| continues to surprise me.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-06-25 23:01 UTC)