Hello everyone! Not exactly sure if it's the right forum to post to but...
So, I made this application called Caditor half a year ago. It's a free text editor licensed under a license which fits the OS definition. Version 1.0 of the program was released onto SourceForge back in June (nobody liked it then). I made version 2 a few months later. So now, I've released Caditor '09 with several times the code as previous releases.
Features include:
500-step undo/redo: just what it sounds like
Caiff: diff-tool to view changes (Clug)
Chas: hashes text in editor (Clug)
Chex: light and simple hex viewer (Clug)
Clugs: useful and powerful plugin system
Dasyn: a faster an more capable syntax highlighter/autocomplete
Date/Time: insert date or time
Favorites: list of bookmarked files
Feedback: convienient way to report bugs
Find/Replace: long await regex replace
Line Endings: convert line endings
Print RTF: now prints in color w/ preview
Reopen: reopens current files
Special Char: insert a special ascii character
TDI: tabbed document interface
Themes: change and make custom themes
More info can be found on the website: http://caditor.sourceforge.net/news/cad09
Download: https://sourceforge.net/project/platformdownload.php?group_id=231949
Sorry if this doesn't belong anywhere on this site but if it doesn't, feel free to delete it.
Visit the Community page
Join our forums
Subscribe to our email newsletter
Subscribe with RSS
Follow us on BlueSky
Follow us on Facebook
Follow us on LinkedIn
Follow us on Mastodon
Just tried it, I gotta say, much better than most of the text editors I've used in the past. Great work. Could use some improvements though.
When I run 3.1.1-cad.exe I get a command prompt window. It goes away before I can see it or do anything with it but I see flashes of something about memory. Well I have plenty of that. Anyways I'm running Windows Vista Home Premium with 3gigs of RAM (Launching this program I'm only using about a gig of that) 2GHz DUAL processor, 32bit OS, and Service Pack 1. I want to try the app it looks pretty cool.
Edit::
I saw the portable archive so I downloaded that and it works. It's something to do with your installer. If I were you I'd try for something like NSIS for installation.
Release Team Member
Strange...that's one area I haven't tested the app with...in Vista. Not sure if that's the problem though. I'll try finding a computer with Vista to do further testing with that.
Hey Caglow. Thanks for dropping in and letting us know. It looks like an interesting project. But it's written in C# and requires the .NET framework to be installed locally. As Vista is the only Windows OS with .NET pre-installed and only accounts for a bit over 20% of PCs you encounter in the wild, we don't consider .NET-based apps to be portable at this time. While they may be handy for specific users with control over both PCs they use (desktop and laptop or work and home for instance) it isn't appropriate for general use as chances are any PC you encounter will not have the appropriate .NET runtime installed.
Sometimes, the impossible can become possible, if you're awesome!
For apps that require .NET could they just not be put into a suite, just left on the app page? Maybe put a special symbol next to the name to identify .net apps as what they are. That way we can still allow portableapps but they know (via the warning) that it may not work on all computers? Because honestly in my experience it's pretty rare for me to run into a computer that does not have .net at least 2.0 (I'm including a couple of my friends, my school [has about 400 computers], and local library. Just a thought...
Release Team Member
Maybe later. Right now, for any apps to be included, they must work on Windows 2000, XP and Vista as installed. More PCs have a Java Virtual Machine installed than the .NET framework, but we aren't doing Java apps until we have a portable JVM.
Most end users have no idea what the .NET framework is and even if we have launchers check and let them know, it would be confusing for non-techies. Installing the .NET framework requires administrative rights, is a large download and often (always?) requires a reboot. And as there really aren't any .NET-based "killer apps", lots of PCs simply don't have it installed (especially net cafes, hotel business centers, libraries, universities and offices that don't develop in C#, etc).
Since .NET is closed/locked down/deeply OS tied, we'll probably never have a portable .NET framework, but once/if the installbase of .NET widens, we'll revisit including .NET apps.
Sometimes, the impossible can become possible, if you're awesome!
Since .NET is closed/locked down/deeply OS tied, we'll probably never have a portable .NET framework, but once/if the installbase of .NET widens, we'll revisit including .NET apps.
Won't the open source Mono system become a viable alternative to .NET? Current status can be found at the Mono Project Home page. I know naughty boys Novell are backing it but from the few UNIX (i.e. Linux and Mac OS X) tests I've done it appears to work. YMMV.
Most .NET-based apps didn't work under Mono from some others I've spoken with. Mono doesn't have full support for the ASP.NET, ADO.NET and Windows.Forms libraries. And those libraries are Microsoft patented and not included under the free use of patents clauses that the CLI and other ECMA-standardized parts of .NET are.
So, while Microsoft won't sue clients of Novell who bought the patent protection, they can potentially sue everyone else (including us) who utilizes or distributes ASP.NET, ADO.NET and Windows.Forms within Mono without paying for the right to do so. So, even though Mono is open source under the GPL, only those who pay Microsoft for the right to implement can do so without potentially running afoul of Microsoft's patents and risking exposure. (Incidentally, this is one of the key things that the GPL 3.0 is designed to prevent going forward.)
Sometimes, the impossible can become possible, if you're awesome!