Edit still available

  • Thread starter Thread starter WhiteTea
  • Start date Start date
message





Twenty-five years ago I posted a comment in some forum to the effect
that if you're still using and liking edlin, you probably also enjoy
dentistry without anesthesia, mow your grass with a reel-action push
mower, and light your cigarettes by rubbing two sticks together.

They and edlin all would get the job done, but indeed, why would you
do it that way? Even then, the relatively simple DOS-based word
processors we had made writing and editing text files far, far
easier.

Can someone explain the OP's desire to edit batch (text) files in a
cmd window? Why not just load it into Notepad, or Notepad++ if
you're
doing coding?

< "Different strokes for different folks."
<
< I don't do coding in a cmd window.
<
< I can often do things far faster in a command line than through a
windows GUI.

Um, okay, some people are very adept at doing complex work in those
black DOS-like boxes with nothing but command lines. I'm not one of
them, although I started with CP/M then DOS so I'm not uncomfortable
with simple tasks there. Vista is making all of us do a lot of >C:
prompt calls to tweak its odd and otherwise inaccessible parameters.

If you don't mind my asking, why the need for a cmd line editor to
create/edit batch files? You still have to open the editor, make your
changes, then save and close it, so IMO there's not much of a penalty
for opening Notepad, working there, then diving back into the cmd
environment.

But if it's just your personal preference to stay in the black cmd box
for all your work, then I'll stop here - different strokes do indeed
work for different folks.

- mazorj
De gustibus non est disputandum,
à chacun ses goûts,
and there's no accounting for tastes.
 
I got to vi right after the editor I described earlier in this thread. It
was *wonderful*, like not banging my head against the wall any more.

Actually, I found vi very useful and easy to use. Not now, I'm very out of
practice, but a few of the commands were still at my fingertips the last
time I looked, two or three years ago.

Edlin isn't so bad for what it is - namely, a crappy editor :-)

Even more fun than vi?
 
The "edit" command invokes edit.com. The *.com suffix means that it's
a 16-bit real-mode program (and that it uses the tiny memory model, if
you remember that far back in x86 programming practice). 16-bit
programs don't run in MS's 64-bit operating systems, so you won't find
it in 64-bit Vista.

Did I say I didn't understand that? I mostly wanted to pretend to complain,
thus the choice of the word "victim" above. And of course to thank <.> for
reminding me that x64 doesn't do 16-bit, and leaving me to realize *all by
myself* that edit is not .ge. 32 bits..

I go back way before 8088, BTW. 7090, 7094, HP 2100, Varian
something-or-other, Data General something-or-other, PDP-1, maybe PDP-8,
and a few others that nobody remembers, including me: some 24-bit machines,
18-bit machines, 16-bit machines, mostly in asm on the minicomputers.

My telephone is way more powerful than most of those. I have have put whole
operas in video on it as a proof of principle.
 
What version of Vista are you using? It is definitely on my Vista Home
Premium SP2.

Location C:\Windows\system32\edit.com

Yes, <.> answered that question in this thread just a bit before your post.
Edit is a 16-bit program, which x64 doesn't handle (by design, I suspect).
And I have x64 :-)

There is a bit of a discussion on that above, leading to a bit of shameless
& uncalled-for bragging on my part.
 
I got to vi right after the editor I described earlier in this thread. It
was *wonderful*, like not banging my head against the wall any more.

Actually, I found vi very useful and easy to use. Not now, I'm very out of
practice, but a few of the commands were still at my fingertips the last
time I looked, two or three years ago.

Edlin isn't so bad for what it is - namely, a crappy editor :-)

If your OS goes night-night and all you can do is boot to a command
line,
then you'll have a expensive paperweight for a while.

Andy
 
< "Different strokes for different folks."
<
< I don't do coding in a cmd window.
<
< I can often do things far faster in a command line than through a
windows GUI.

Um, okay, some people  are very adept at doing complex work in those
black DOS-like boxes with nothing but command lines.  I'm not one of
them, although I started with CP/M then DOS so I'm not uncomfortable
with simple tasks there.  Vista is making all of us do a lot of >C:
prompt calls to tweak its odd and otherwise inaccessible parameters.

If you don't mind my asking, why the need for a cmd line editor to
create/edit batch files?  You still have to open the editor, make your
changes, then save and close it, so IMO there's not much of a penalty
for opening Notepad, working there, then diving back into the cmd
environment.

But if it's just your personal preference to stay in the black cmd box
for all your work, then I'll stop here - different strokes do indeed
work for different folks.

You can do a boat load more than just edit files at the command line.

You are right about Vista "making us do some more things".

It's taken a lot of research to find out how to get Vista to let you
do what was relatively easy in XP.

It was nice learning how to turn off UAC.

I was half expecting Vista to pop up a message saying, "Do you need to
take a bathroom break before Vista updates the time for you?"

Take care,

Andy
 
If your OS goes night-night and all you can do is boot to a command
line,
then you'll have a expensive paperweight for a while.

Andy

I am trying without success to figure out how the above relates to what I
posted. Care to help me?
 
Back
Top