Fog Creek Software
Discussion Board

CodeWright editor

Anyone use a recent version?  The latest is 7.5 I think.  I downloaded the demo, and it definitely has some very good features.  However, it seems a bit buggy and rough around the edges.  I would want to use it for C/C++, perl, XML.  Basically I want to have a consistent, customizeable editing interface across many programming tasks. 

Comments?  Any alternatives?  I am looking for something to integrate with a lot of other tools (source control, compilers, etc.), has a thoughtful UI, keyboard shortcuts, and is relatively lightweight.  I actually like the VS.NET editor but it is too bloated to use as just an editor and it has a bunch of interface bugs that are very annoying.

Thursday, June 5, 2003

There's actually quite a few editors out there. I personally use Multi-Edit (since I used to work for them in my early days of my career). I've been able to quickly setup syntax highlighting for a lot of script languages that I use. I also has the ability to show two different syntax highlighting in the same document. It can show HTML in one color schema, while showing ASP or JavaScript in another. Pretty nifty! I also used it to code an ASP.NET application for internal use.

There's also UltraEdit, EditPad Pro, and SlickEdit. I'm sure the people who frequent this forum will post more names for you.

For XML, I would recommend XML Spy. It beats anything I've tried hands down.

Thursday, June 5, 2003

I've used CodeWright for a number of years--I'm on 7.0. I recently purchased Visual SlickEdit, though, for its Eclipse plug-in (I spend my days in WSAD 5.0). Both are worth the $$.

Rob Warner
Friday, June 6, 2003

TextPad is another fine option.  It may not do as much as CodeWright, but delivers quite a lot for a much lower price.

Bruce Perry
Friday, June 6, 2003

Wow, no one mentioned Emacs? ;)

Keith Wright
Friday, June 6, 2003

I'll mention emacs

Stay FAR FAR away.  Unless you want get extreme carpal tunnel from trying to press CTRL-X CTRL-S, ESC CTRL-X V etc etc and if you want to have to get used to something that uses different keys from all other programs since GUIs were invented.  Also if you want to modify it you'll have to learn lisp.  Although I'm sure learning lisp is a good thing in general I'm sure you've got better things to do.

I recommend Slickedit.  Been using it since 94.  I don't have enough experience with other editors to know if there are better ones out there.  I do know that I turned down Codewrite after using for a week before I started using Slickedit (ie, also in 94) so that opinion may be out of date.

Gregg Tavares
Friday, June 6, 2003

SlickEdit, definitely. 

Borland now owns CodeWright and their history of stewardship with past editors they purchased is pretty poor.  They bought Brief and did exactly zero with it.

Mitch & Murray (from downtown)
Friday, June 6, 2003

UltraEdit is a fine tool at a very reasonable price, a free trial version is available from:


Peter McKenzie
Friday, June 6, 2003

I downloaded the demo last month. I like the features, especially the Brief keymap. But I lost significant data while using CodeWright. I couldn't pin it on the editor 100%, but I'm not interested in a product that might piss my work away.

Clutch Cargo
Saturday, June 7, 2003

I like the design of CodeWright but it was always crash-happy.  It's also one of those products that became a red-headed stepchild when the original company was bought out.  CW was owned by Premia for the last couple of years; they churned out several expensive updates with very few actual changes. Now it's moved on to Borland whose performance in the post-Turbo years was anything but stellar.

In other words, I wouldn't take the risk. Try Visual Studio .NET if it supports your programming language, or EmEditor ( ) for smaller tasks (notepad replacement).

Oh, and note that most editors are actually not fully Unicode compliant, no matter what propaganda lies they might post on their website.  CodeWright isn't, and Visual SlickEdit isn't either (check the online help for "Unicode" and marvel at a gigantic list of things that don't work yet).  However, VS.NET and EmEditor are both internally Unicode-based and can handle all Unicode formats.

Chris Nahr
Saturday, June 7, 2003

Hm yeah I already have VS.NET at work, and CodeWright does seem pretty buggy, and it isn't cheap.  I have downloaded demos of SlickEdit and SourceInsight.  SourceInsight does seem to have some really impressive code browsing features, but I think it is not really complete as an IDE.

I think I will give VS.NET another chance, try to learn more about it... all the interface bugs are really annoying though.  The windowing system design I think was pretty good, but the way it was implemented is maddening.  Also I haven't tried using the command window in VS.NET.  I think you type tons of commands down there, but I haven't used them.  And also I heard you have access to some model of the source?  Like basically it parses source for you, and you can use that to write your own code-browsing utilites??  Anyone know about this.  I think that is basically what VisualAssist uses.

Saturday, June 7, 2003

Are you using VS.NET 2003 at work? If not you should (convince your boss to) upgrade -- 2003 is basically a bugfix release for 2002, and a very cheap upgrade (US$29). The 2002 version crashed quite frequently for me but 2003 hasn't crashed once. Still a couple of bugs (e.g. can't overwrite XML doc files in target directory) but apparently nothing serious anymore.

VS.NET offers a comprehensive programming model for scripting and extensions, using VB.NET or other .NET languages, but it's really quite involved -- I looked at it and decided that I'd rather write C# programs and batch files that operate directly on my source code files...

Chris Nahr
Sunday, June 8, 2003

*  Recent Topics

*  Fog Creek Home