You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
Is there a decent word processor for the command line? I mean opens rtf files spell checks, saves in .doc basically an abiword at the cli?
I'm just lost n00b!
Offline
Not that I know of. I would suggest to use LaTeX.
Evil #archlinux@libera.chat channel op and general support dude.
. files on github, Screenshots, Random pics and the rest
Offline
Hmm well maybe when i learn to program ill write one. Spell check could just highlight the words red... hmm yes sounds good.Thx Mr.Elendig!
I'm just lost n00b!
Offline
that would actually be really damn cool... haha
please provide an option for vi-like modal operation?? =P
Offline
What about porting Word Perfect to Linux? :-)
Offline
If you are, (which would be awesome) could you please give it the same controls (or similar) to nano?
@sirius: Don't even kid about that kind of stuff.
I need to find a way out so everyone can find their way out.
Resregietd Lunix Uesr: 485581
Offline
Hello, Google!
WP for Linux does exist - http://linuxmafia.com/pub/linux/apps/
I'm not sure if it's for X or cli...
Offline
.
Last edited by GGLucas (2022-06-24 08:15:20)
Offline
Oh, just for fun and play :-)
For real work, even I use vim and LaTeX.
Offline
You also may want to install vim-latexsuite from AUR. It is a great tool which I don't want to miss.
To know or not to know ...
... the questions remain forever.
Offline
what does vim-latexsuite do?
Offline
what does vim-latexsuite do?
google? or even look in the aur yourself to see?
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=25134
vim-latexsuite attempts to provide a comprehensive set of tools to view, edit and compile LaTeX documents in Vim. Together, they provide tools starting from macros to speed up editing LaTeX documents to functions for forward searching .dvi documents.
Last edited by stefanwilkens (2009-05-27 01:37:20)
Arch i686 on Phenom X4 | GTX760
Offline
Sorry to resurrect an old thread, I all of a sudden remembered about this post. Anyway, I did use google. What I meant was, how does that really help? While writing in vim, I always limit it to 100 characters anyway, which is half a screen. The other half can be used for viewing. Additionally, when I use a document class I've made, I know how it's going to turn out, ergo I don't need to really see what it looks like, so I usually don't preview what I've made anyway.
And you can always access the command line through :sh or execute a command with :! So I was wondering if there were any real advantages to it. I guess not?
Offline
Vim-latex also includes a lot of shortcuts for entering latex macros and environments. These can make editing LaTeX files a lot faster.
An even more powerful tool is AUCTeX for emacs. In addition to great syntax highlighting, it can also fold up macros (e.g., footnotes, emph, etc.) for a "clean," more word-processor like view of the text (if you're into that kind of thing).
Last edited by madalu (2009-06-01 04:25:03)
Offline
LaTeX!
MacGregor DESPITE THEM!
7f 45 4c 46 01 01 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
Offline
An even more powerful tool is AUCTeX for emacs. In addition to great syntax highlighting, it can also fold up macros (e.g., footnotes, emph, etc.) for a "clean," more word-processor like view of the text (if you're into that kind of thing).
This is built in in vim-latexsuite as well. It enables folding by default and vim is extremely flexible defining whre folds should go.
To know or not to know ...
... the questions remain forever.
Offline
madalu wrote:An even more powerful tool is AUCTeX for emacs. In addition to great syntax highlighting, it can also fold up macros (e.g., footnotes, emph, etc.) for a "clean," more word-processor like view of the text (if you're into that kind of thing).
This is built in in vim-latexsuite as well. It enables folding by default and vim is extremely flexible defining whre folds should go.
I'm aware of section folding.
But can vim-latex fold a footnote like this\footnote{Here is a footnote and imagine if this footnote ran on for several lines.} so that it looks like this or a bibtex citation\cite[10]{someauthor_book_2002} so that it looks like this?
But can vim-latex fold a footnote like this[f] so that it looks like this or a bibtex citation[c] so that it looks like this?
AUCTeX also nicely indents multi-line footnote text to set it off from the body text.
If there is a way to do this in vim-latex I'd love to know. Thanks.
Last edited by madalu (2009-06-01 17:28:53)
Offline
But can vim-latex fold a footnote like this\footnote{Here is a footnote and imagine if this footnote ran on for several lines.} so that it looks like this or a bibtex citation\cite[10]{someauthor_book_2002} so that it looks like this?
But can vim-latex fold a footnote like this[f] so that it looks like this or a bibtex citation[c] so that it looks like this?
This is awesome.
And, no, vim-latexsuite can't do this, as far as I know.
==> But, please, do not start another emacs vs. vim flame war. <==
I use both, and vim fits me better. It is good to know, what is possible on either side. That's all.
Last edited by bernarcher (2009-06-01 19:10:31)
To know or not to know ...
... the questions remain forever.
Offline
madalu wrote:But can vim-latex fold a footnote like this\footnote{Here is a footnote and imagine if this footnote ran on for several lines.} so that it looks like this or a bibtex citation\cite[10]{someauthor_book_2002} so that it looks like this?
But can vim-latex fold a footnote like this[f] so that it looks like this or a bibtex citation[c] so that it looks like this?
This is awesome.
And, no, vim-latexsuite can't do this, as far as I know.==> But, please, do not start another emacs vs. vim flame war. <==
I use both, and vim fits me better. It is good to know, what is possible on either side. That's all.
No danger of another flame war here. I adore vim and emacs and use them both regularly. It's nice to find other users who feel the same way.
The only flame war I'll get drawn into here is if someone starts to praise MS Word.
Offline
Pages: 1