From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: bakul@bitblocks.com (Bakul Shah) Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 10:13:35 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] basic tools / Universal Unix In-Reply-To: References: <20171030141645.6F81C18C0E7@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <20171115021648.GL6265@mcvoy.com> <6b4ef803-489b-00f5-4a87-14ab907090f8@gmail.com> <108d318d-3879-e056-8b63-f333f85e5516@kilonet.net> <8b1ce7d5-d626-b523-d134-60efd61a0386@kilonet.net> Message-ID: Tom Almy's version, based on Pete Siemsen's TECO implementation is available as a FreeBSD port. Also runs on a bunch of other platforms. A more recent version with Blake McBride's changes is at https://github.com/blakemcbride/TECOC. I had used TECO a long time ago on TOPS-10 so I played with this version but it feels completely foreign to me now:-) > On Nov 15, 2017, at 8:48 AM, Clem Cole wrote: > > Teco commands were described as being 'indistinguishable from line noise.' On 10/30/120 cps dial up lines, that was not always a good thing ;-) > > One of my favorite stories of teco years ago, one of my friends was editing a teco macro and had gotten up from his terminal for a minute, his wife looked at the screen and asked him if his 2 year old has been attacking the keyboard again. > > Clem > > BTW: My friend and former co-worker, Paul Cantrell wrote an excellent teco implemnentation for UNIX. I believe if you go to his web site (copters.com) and poke around its available for download. > > On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Arthur Krewat wrote: > Ah, a later reply pointed out the minimalist thing. never mind ;) > > > > On 11/15/2017 11:13 AM, Arthur Krewat wrote: >> I still don't get what was so bad about TECO. >> >> *20t$$ >> <20 lines of text> >> *fs$$$ >> *0lt$$ ; type current line to review what you've changed. >> >> Very simple. >> >> *$$ >> >> replace all occurrences of textsearch. >> >> Now, of course, searching for something like a regular expression was much harder. >> >> Q-registers, all sorts of cool stuff. >> >> But then, maybe I'm talking about a later version of TECO than you all. I think I was on version 22 on TOPS-10 6.03A >> >> >> On 11/14/2017 10:07 PM, Will Senn wrote: >>> I wasn't going to say it earlier, but now that you've said something about it... I was thinking, thank god, ed isn't teco! :). >>> >>> On 11/14/17 8:37 PM, Warner Losh wrote: >>>> It took me a while to realize that ed(1) is what TECO should have been.... Too much TECO trauma scared me away for far too long.... But maybe it was all the TECO macros I wrote to make the BH100 terminal useful as an editor in full screen mode.... >>>> >>>> Warner >>>> >>>> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 7:16 PM, Larry McVoy wrote: >>>> +1. Anyone who gets this is someone I'd work with. >>>> >>>> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 08:10:41PM -0600, Will Senn wrote: >>>> > On 11/14/17 7:25 PM, Nemo wrote: >>>> > >On 31/10/2017, Dave Horsfall wrote: >>>> > >>A previous boss insisted that all his support staff learn ED, because one >>>> > >>day it might be the only editor available on a trashed box (you can't >>>> > >>mount /usr etc). >>>> > >ed man; man ed >>>> > > >>>> > >https://www.gnu.org/fun/jokes/ed-msg.html (Sorry -- could not resist) >>>> > > >>>> > >N. >>>> > >>>> > For all that it's the butt of jokes, ed is awesome. I didn't really >>>> > appreciate it until vi wasn't an easy goto option anymore (v6). After >>>> > reading Kernighan's tutorial, I kind of fell in love with it. g/re/p? Who'd >>>> > of thunk it? ed may not be 'visual', but the entire document is editable and >>>> > its support of regex and the global command are incredibly powerful. >>>> > Especially, for so incredibly tiny an editor. Finally, ed is the sibling of >>>> > sed and once I got the connection there, it opened up a whole new world of >>>> > editing awesomeness. >>>> > >>>> > Will >>>> > >>>> > -- >>>> > GPG Fingerprint: 68F4 B3BD 1730 555A 4462 7D45 3EAA 5B6D A982 BAAF >>>> >>>> -- >>>> --- >>>> Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com http://www.mcvoy.com/lm >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> GPG Fingerprint: 68F4 B3BD 1730 555A 4462 7D45 3EAA 5B6D A982 BAAF >>> >> > >