#Editpad lite autosave did not save text update#
#Editpad lite autosave did not save text code#
#Editpad lite autosave did not save text plus#

(unless, of course, the first column and the first row would be always visible) - CrazyTerabyte 01:42, (UTC) If all tables were merged in only one, it would be really confusing to look at them. The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.193.63.155 ( talk This article is a wonderful resource, but surely some of these tables could be combined somehow, so readers didn't have to scroll up and down constantly to make comparisons. Heptite (T) (C) 07:42, 14 December 2006 (UTC) Merge tables Hopefully I didn't introduce any problems. I've finished (and fixed) what IE started. The question is whether to carry through some or all of IE's changes to the rest of the tables, or go back to the way they were. You're correct that it would have to be handled carefully.

#Editpad lite autosave did not save text plus#

I mean the edits starting at 12:03, 2 October 2006 and ending with 06:12, 5 October 2006 (a couple of edits by others are mixed in), plus another at 13:30, 13 October 2006. (IE ended up reverting at least one correction - maybe several - so it might take a bit of work.) - Smjg 15:32, 1 November 2006 (UTC) Sorry.

And if we're going to revert anything, we should be careful not to revert any corrections/updates to the information itself. Heptite (T) (C) 23:29, 31 October 2006 (UTC) It would help to know which of IE's modifications you're talking about, and which version it is that you're claiming looked better. I hate to say it, but I'm tempted to revert IE's modifications of the tables, mostly because the modifications haven't been carried through to be consistent on all the tables, but also because I think they looked better before the modifications.

#Editpad lite autosave did not save text update#

Since JOE is already marked as an editor that runs on Windows, could anyone please test these packages and update the page if they actually work? Or, is the lack of the Cygwin packge for the latest stable version of Nano a sufficient reason to say 'it doesn't run on Windows'? - Alexander Patrakov 07:03, 18 September 2006 (UTC) There's a natively compiled version of nano for windows, for stable 1.2 and probably coming soon for stable 2.0.0Р’В :) - Dustin Howett 12:18, 08 November 2006 (EDT) IE's modifications However, Cygwin packages for the old version do exist at. A D Monroe III ( talk) 16:17, 27 November 2007 (UTC) Nano on CygwinР”В¬urrently, Nano is listed as an editor that doesn't run on Windows. Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.106.236.86 ( talk) 15:57, Aug(UTC) Related to this, I would also like to see 'tags' searching feature comparison, that is, editors that can easily jump to the definition or use of any symbol, based on the programming language support provided by the editor. Codewrite has it, and I've just found jedit does, but strangely enough this doesn't seem to be that common for such a simple thing. It would be good to add this feature to the comparison tables.

83 64-bit nativ Version is main part for large memory support.

81 Appropriate to include Midnight Commander text editor?.

72 File size limit for editors in general.

70 Add 'Hyperlink support' to basic features.

66 Text editors written in Javascript (runnable in web pages).

62 Is spell checking a Basic feature or a Special tool?.

60 Please add a column for find-in-files feature to functionality matrix.

47 Unicode and other character encodings.

35 What does 'Multiple Instances' refer to?.

#Editpad lite autosave did not save text code#

23 Syntax highlighting and code folding.

19 Unicode text editors other than Notepad.

18 Multiple vs Single document interface.

11 removing spam and non-notable editors.

8 Keep the same order of editors each list of features.