I second that.  Emacs (like) editor support.
A user can always reconfigure to be like their
favorite editor.  Plus with emacs you get whole
lotta extra stuff, to boot.

My $0.02,
Walt...

-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Dattalo [mailto:scott@DATTALO.COM]
Sent: Friday, April 14, 2000 1:57 PM
To: PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
Subject: Re: Syntax Highlighting in MPLAB


On Fri, 14 Apr 2000, Darrel Johansen wrote:

> My question to the PICLIST community:  What editor would you like to use
> with MPLAB?

I know I'm a minority, but I use Emacs (even when I have to use Windows I
still
use emacs). You get pic-syntax highlighting thanks to James Cameron. But at
the
same time, you get C highlighting, vhdl highlighting and probably every
other
language highlighting that exists. Furthermore you get the function lists
with
the 20.4+ releases (it works for C and C++ - I quite doubt it works for
assembly).

In addition, emacs supports cvs like Craig wants.

Actually, emacs supports probably every feature of every editor that's ever
existed.

But I don't use MPLAB, so my views are certainly not worth much as far as
suggest which editor to use. So instead of suggesting on standardizing on a
new
editor, why not just allow ANY editor to be used. I fully understand the
practical consequences... (i.e. it ain't gonna be easy). However, a good
modern
editor is configurable and should support spawning other processes. (MPLAB
can
be made to be just another process).



Scott

PS. I also use pine as my mail reader. I also use toothpicks to pry my
eyelids
open so I can program all night too :). So take my opinions for what they're
worth.