UltraEdit is a great TextEditor for windows. It is available at http://www.ultraedit.com. Regular Expressions, great formatting tools, etc. -- IanMaurer
It's a good editor (it was our standard at a previous job), but it's not great. Syntax highlighting is annoyingly primitive (compared to Emacs, anyway), it's poor at handling ftp errors (and doesn't check for modified files when saving ftp files). On the other hand, it's _lots_ smaller than Emacs :-) -- AnonymousDonor
UltraEdit is my Perl IDE. It can be configured to pass the file being edited to a program (for example, to a compiler or interpreter), and capture the output. It's also one-click to get from a page of HTML (which can be generated) to a browser. With a bit of scaffolding, this makes CGI development easier. --DaveSmith
Why are these things considered 'features'?I should think they represent bare minimum capabilities for an editor to be considered acceptable for development. Is the size of emacs really an issue these days? Is it really worth moving to a smaller editor with a subset of its capabilities? Note, I am wandering off topic for this page, as I don't know much about ultraedit per se, but was responding to the comments here...
For me at least, the fabulous thing about UltraEdit is that it is disk based. I often have to edit files hundreds of megabytes in size by hand and while it isn't quick it will work. And if there isn't enough disk space for an editting copy, you can work on a file directly. -- John Dougan
Again, emacs does this. Maybe "fabulous" compared to Microsoft word... I'm sure you find it useful, but it seems limited to me.
Sure emacs does it. But I personally would rather work with a text editor that follows platform UI standards. People have hacked up emacs pretty far to make this happen (eg. Aquamacs) but I'd rather just use an editor built to them.
Excellent editor! Interestingly, it shares many features and functions with TextPad, to the point where one wonders which is copying the other.