Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!batcomputer!cornell!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!o.gp.cs.cmu.edu!netnews
From: Ralf.Brown@B.GP.CS.CMU.EDU
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer
Subject: Re: editor
Message-ID: <2805be69@ralf>
Date: 12 Apr 91 14:04:25 GMT
Sender: netnews@cs.cmu.edu (USENET News Group Software)
Organization: Carnegie Mellon University School of Computer Science
Lines: 26
In-Reply-To: <1991Apr10.160159.11372@novell.com>

In article <1991Apr10.160159.11372@novell.com>, tporczyk@na.excelan.com (Tony Porczyk) wrote:
}The News Manager)
}In article <1491@lehi3b15.csee.Lehigh.EDU> jearly@lehi3b15.csee.Lehigh.EDU (John Early) writes:
}>Last night I wanted to edit a DOS file that was 1243651 bytes long.  I only
}>found one real editor in my collection that would do it: Borland's Sprint.
}
}Brief will edit it, Sage will, even though I am not crazy of
}either.  Question: How many times do you have a file of this size to
}work with?  I think I would rather stick to my "limited to memory" and
}fast like a lightning editor and use a word processor in a text-only
}mode for those rare events when I have an elephant to edit. There is a
}good chance some of those editors will start making use of 386 ability
}to address extended memory, and all the problems will be over.

Why not have both speed and unlimited file size?  Epsilon will search
through an entire 1 meg file (for a nonexistent string) in only 1.5
seconds on my 386, and uses EMS memory if available for storing the
files you are working on (it can also swap to one or more disks if
needed).  For files which Qedit can handle, Epsilon is just as fast as
Qedit, and in fact loads the files more quickly.

--
{backbone}!cs.cmu.edu!ralf  ARPA: RALF@CS.CMU.EDU   FIDO: Ralf Brown 1:129/3.1
BITnet: RALF%CS.CMU.EDU@CMUCCVMA   AT&Tnet: (412)268-3053 (school)   FAX: ask
DISCLAIMER?  Did  | It isn't what we don't know that gives us trouble, it's
I claim something?| what we know that ain't so.  --Will Rogers