Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Good Web Development Environments with UTF-8 Support?

Posted by Cliff on from the satisfying-a-long-list-of-required-features dept.

A Pride of Lyings asks: "I'm having a devil of a time finding a good editor or IDE aimed at HTML/XHTML/CSS/JavaScript/JSP/XML that meets the following criteria: CVS integration (VSS integration would be nice but not required); stellar UTF-8 support (internationalization is a big big deal now); correctly recognizes and highlights HTML, JSP, JS, and CSS within a single file; does some rudimentary auto-completion; is easily configurable; runs on Win2k (oy vey); supports bookmarks of various kinds; supports code collapsing; and affordable. I'm at a loss and rather fatigued from kicking all of these tires, so I'm throwing it open to you: what do you use for your front-end work? What makes it good?"

2 of 46 comments (clear)

  1. Re:TexPad by metacosm · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Powerful tools require an investment initially in time. With vim, that investment is not lost because it has #1. been around a long time, #2. has a great support channel (irc.freenode.net #vim) #3. supports well over 200 programming languages and #4. works on a ton of platforms.

    Vim also acts consistant while doing all this -- unlike emacs, which can act radically different based on mode, vim is always an editor first and foremost.

    While it is an investment of time to do vimtutor (half an hour) and read some online vim tutorials (maybe an hour) -- it has a very high degree of payoff.

  2. Re:Vi Improved (VIM) by metacosm · · Score: 2, Insightful
    • Slow learning curve: I would argue that the learning curve per feature is very low, the only really hard part is the first hour or two, but for someone who uses it in a professional setting, this is hardly a deal breaker.
    • No user friendly manual: I am not sure what you mean by user friendly, since I find the :h (help topic) very easy.
    • Entirely different philosophy from other common editors: Working with modes are different (see the first and last points).
    • Some of the nice features need to be integrated: I consider a plugin interface a big positive, not a negative, I don't think every feature under the sun needs to be a part of the core setup
    • ... create usable custom settings ...: I hardly think this are required for editting, and I think it is more natural to slowly grow your abbreviations/macros as you go.
    • You have to stop walking before you shoot: The age old modes debate! I think modes cost you a small bit on the leading edge, but save you a ton of time during the "project".