3 ms·
I was never much of an ed user but I did a lot of stuff in EDLIN on PC DOS 3.1. Ed seems a little more powerful and useful. With 512K of RAM on a 6MHz 80286,
by projektfu 4y ago
I was never much of an ed user but I did a lot of stuff in EDLIN on PC DOS 3.1. Ed seems a little more powerful and useful.
With 512K of RAM on a 6MHz 80286, using an editor that fit into one "segment" and loaded quickly from a floppy was nice. The original DOS 1.0 edlin was just over 2K.
Of course, we had printed manuals back then, and you could learn EDLIN with the manual on your lap while you typed commands.
- shadowofneptune 4y agoI tried out programming in DOS using tools of the period, and I found edlin surprisingly easy to use; easier to get into than ed. It did have a few quirks. It uses the ASCII SUB character, ^Z, to separate the fields of a substitution command. That does eliminate escaping issues at least.