good text editor for DOS

[bjt]

The editor that comes with MS C 6.0A is OK and can probably be massaged to run TASM instead of MASM.

 

[mdanh2002]

If it's simple you're after, you might also consider Dave Dunfield's DDSIDE that he supplied with his Micro-C package.

Thanks. Let me try it out.

I use "MS-DOS Editor" (edit.com) that comes right along with DOS. Always have, always will. I even use it to hand-code my websites, making sure to include its name in the "generator" tag of the HTML.

One of the good things about MS-DOS editor is that it handles both Windows and Linux line breaks just fine. Too bad Microsoft never updates it to support long file names and removes it in 64-bit of Windows.

I still can't get used to Vim and Emacs. Too counter-intuitive for me - it's easy to get confused between command mode and edit mode. On Linux/Unix, my favorite editor is still Nano If there's a need to make complicated changes, I download the file to my computer, edit using a modern GUI editor, and upload it back

 

[Plasma]

MS-DOS Editor 2.0 (shipped with Windows 95 and onward) supports long filenames. You will need a LFN driver if you are using an older version of DOS.

NTVDM doesn't (and can't) exist in 64-bit Windows, so that's why it's removed.

 

[kgober]

I still can't get used to Vim and Emacs. Too counter-intuitive for me - it's easy to get confused between command mode and edit mode. On Linux/Unix, my favorite editor is still Nano If there's a need to make complicated changes, I download the file to my computer, edit using a modern GUI editor, and upload it back

vi and emacs make more sense when you use them on a terminal that has no function keys, no cursor movement keys, and no numeric keypad. Try to imagine making an editor for a video terminal that has only typewriter keys plus an Enter key, a Control key and an Escape key. Those are the design constraints that vi and emacs had to work within.

 

[DeathAdderSF]

One of the good things about MS-DOS editor is that it handles both Windows and Linux line breaks just fine. Too bad Microsoft never updates it to support long file names and removes it in 64-bit of Windows.

I use vDosPlus on my 64-bit Windows to run MS-DOS Editor. It's more convenient than using DOSBox.

 

[Stone]

I agree that it's very nice and has a much better default font than DOSBox but I don't see it being any more convenient. I use ProGammaX as a DOSBox frontend and it makes everything a one click operation which is about convenient as it gets.

 

[8008guy]

vi

Saves me frm the pain of too much thnkng.

 

[bttr]

I would suggest Semware Editor Pro for DOS. You can add menu's, execute commands etc. Not sure if the free trial version has all that stuff in it (macro compiler, etc that allows you to do all the good stuff).

https://www.semware.com/

Just in case: "The SemWare® Editor is now freeware." So one can download the 1997 DOS version 2.50e for free.

Also available are (free) versions for Windows and Linux.

 

[ajacocks]

Interesting, I’ve never heard of SemWare. Looks like it was a nice text-only editor.

- Alex

 

[Quagmire]

PC Tools is pretty good.

PC Tools 4.x

PC Tools, from Central Point Software, is a system and disk utility suite similar to the Norton Utilities. Central Point also produced a similar set of tools for the Apple Macintosh known as MacTools. Central Point Backup, bundled as part of PC-Tools, was also offered as a standalone product.

winworldpc.com

 

[doshea]

Just in case: "The SemWare® Editor is now freeware." So one can download the 1997 DOS version 2.50e for free.

Also available are (free) versions for Windows and Linux.

Nice, thanks! Our family used its predecessor QEdit (or Q.EXE as I think of it) as our primary text editor when we first got a PC, but once we got MS-DOS 5 I think I just started using its EDIT because I was familiar with it from using QuickBASIC. I didn't use much of QEdit's power but it seems like it could do a lot for something that was only around 50KB in size!

PC Tools is pretty good.

I used lots of other parts of PC Tools, but I don't know that I ever used its editor. Would I be correct in guessing that it wasn't very powerful, but it was easy to use?

 

[Twospruces]

I expected to see Norton Edit in the list, but I guess I will recommend.

 

[rlauzon]

I used Edwin a lot back in the 2-disk-drive days. I liked it because it used the Turbo Pascal-like commands (Wordstar?) that I was familiar with and it was small and fast.
Today, for my MS-DOS machines, I use Norton Edit.

 

[Chuck(G)]

There's also the Joe editor for DOS. It's available in many OS flavors. I don't know what the minimum practical system configuration is, but I do use it on DOS, Win32 and Linux.

 

[bocke]

I usually use a variant of Vi.

For "serious work" I use Vim versions 5.x and 6.x. Vim 7.x is large and buggy on DOS. Even 5.x/6.x come with too much configuration files, some completely unneeded on DOS. I usually clean them up a bit to save space. I've also tried earlier versions and they were fine, even supporting multiple undo, but no syntax highlighting and some other more modern features. When I have to work in real mode, I prefer those older versions as they have smaller requirements and are not crippled in RM like VIM 5.x and newer.

I've also been trying out Open Watcom's vi, but it needs to be "extracted" from the bundle manually. Last time I missed something so it didn't have all the features. Syntax highlighting worked though.

I've sometimes also used an earlier clone called Calvin which is very small (47,2 kb). An even earlier version of Calvin was available as Freevi. That one might have less features, but it's very small (24.8 kb), so it's great for startup floppies. If you are a vi fanatic, like I am. :D

I think both Vim and Elvis were based on Stevie. Stevie is kinda minimal but it's also much smaller than either (77,7 kb).

Out of the others...

The ones I actually use (or at least put on startup floppies) are:

SHH ED by Sverre H. Huseby is a great little text editor (17,4 kb). Small but feature-full. Great for startup floppies.

Another one of those small ones is TE by John Haluska. It's a bit bigger (29,9kb), but still feature full. It uses a Wordstar like key bindings.

Microemacs from Digital Mars. Very clean and small(-ish) Microemacs version (RM 71,3 kb, PM 88,5 kb). There are both real-mode and protected mode versions.

 

[Chuck(G)]

SEMWare's editor was pretty good and I think there's a version of MINCE for DOS; heck, there's even a DOS version of Joe.

 

[Quagmire]

Kind of beating a dead horse here as this thread is 7 years old or so and the OP is long gone.

 

[cjs]

Kind of beating a dead horse here as this thread is 7 years old or so and the OP is long gone.

This information is useful to others, too. Threads are not about the OP only, they are about the community.

And it's certainly much better to post additional information to an existing thread, as it keeps the information together and makes it easier to find.

 

[Zare]

I did pick up Semware from this thread and it's a great editor.
Speaking of which, I'm unable to find documentation how to do macros for external commands.

 

[Quagmire]

This information is useful to others, too. Threads are not about the OP only, they are about the community.

And it's certainly much better to post additional information to an existing thread, as it keeps the information together and makes it easier to find.

Yeah, you are correct. There are lots of dead-end threads here that you could resurrect if you choose.