EDLIN

HomePage | RecentChanges | EditorIndex | TextEditorFamilies | Preferences

Edlin is perhaps the most famously bad editor in history, outside of Notepad, and Notepad is actually much better than edlin. It is a DOS editor, included as the default text editor before the introduction of edit.com with MSDOS 5. It's copied (badly) from ed, with a cryptic line-editor interface and little user feedback--though it does manage some help text. Basic commands include append, write, end, and so on. While the user is actually entering text into the file, he is placed at a prompt indented about eight spaces from the left side of the screen--an odd design decision for an era when many DOS displays had forty columns.

There is no real reason to use edlin today, but it's still included with Windows XP. Enter edlin filename in the run dialog to experience its majesty for yourself.

Official documentation here:

Microsoft Windows XP - Edlin
http://www.microsoft.com/resources/documentation/windows/xp/all/proddocs/en-us/edlin.mspx?mfr=true

Using MS-DOS Edlin Utility to Edit Text Files
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb%3Ben-us%3B67706

"Using Edlin to Edit Files Too Large to Fit in Memory"
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb%3Ben-us%3B81854

Other documentation:

http://www.dreamlandbbs.com/files/utils/batch/edlindoc.zip


Despised though it was, EDLIN had one feature widely overlooked. It could be run in a batch file and do scripted edits. DOS batch file hackers made use of this facility in ways reminiscent of sed on Unix. --DMcCunney


Note to 189-69-62-29.dsl.telesp.net.br: Please add your disagreements as comments after the text, instead of changing the original posting. I reverted your changes.

As for the comments of "Says who?" about Edlin being famously bad, and Notepad better than Edlin, the short answer is "Everyone". As mentioned, Edlin was based roughly on Unix ed, and originated in the days when PCs were far less powerful than now. No hard drives, no VGA, and quite possibly, 256KB of RAM instead of the 640K that rapidly became standard. Emphasis on stuff included in DOS was the minimum required functionality, in a small size. You used it because you had to, but I don't recall anyone who liked it, and no one with a choice used Edlin for editing. As mentioned, edlin did have the advantage of being used in a scripted fashion and called from a batch file to do automated edits. I knew a few folks back when that did so. I preferred a DOS port of Unix sed. --DMcCunney


HomePage | RecentChanges | EditorIndex | TextEditorFamilies | Preferences
Edit text of this page | View other revisions
Last edited May 28, 2014 5:35 pm (diff)
Search: