When comparing Syntaxic vs SciTE, the Slant community recommends SciTE for most people. In the question“What are the best open-source text editors for programming?” SciTE is ranked 26th while Syntaxic is ranked 38th. The most important reason people chose SciTE is:
It's property files allow for fine tweaks of its behavior, at a global or per language / project level. These textual settings might be confusing for those used to preference dialogs, but prove to be powerful, flexible, and fine grained.
Specs
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Cross-platform
Syntaxic is available on Windows, OSX, and Linux.
Pro Built-in Shell
Syntaxic has a built-in terminal emulator.
Pro Code completion
Syntaxic offers symbol completion.
Pro SSH editing
Syntaxic permits editing files through SSH and it also supports features such as sudo
, su
, and tunneling.
Pro Flexible
It's property files allow for fine tweaks of its behavior, at a global or per language / project level. These textual settings might be confusing for those used to preference dialogs, but prove to be powerful, flexible, and fine grained.
Pro Lightweight
With less than 2 MB of binary on Windows, SciTE starts instantly. Plus, if you don't need all the config, syntax files, blah, there's a 678k standalone .exe version. Nothing is going to beat that for lightweight and start-up times. Stick it in a folder that is already on your PATH.
Pro Powerful
Based on the Scintilla source code editor, SciTE has some advanced features like rectangular editing, simple regular expression search and replace, code folding, etc. It allows the user to launch a compiler or interpreter, and it can also interpret the error messages, jumping at the location they point to.
Lua scripting is key to SciTE's power and flexibility. The Lua scripting language can be used to perform complex text transformations. It's relatively simple syntax and its large user-base makes it a great choice for a scripting feature.
Pro Built-in shell
The console window can show the result of ran commands (like build current file, reporting warnings, and errors), but also accept interactive shell commands.
Pro Portable
SciTE works on Windows and Linux, and it also has a commercial port on MacOS.
Pro Powerful syntax highlighting for numerous languages
Lexers providing folding and syntax highlighting are based on code, not on regular expressions. They support context, nesting, special rules, etc.
Pro Free (except on Mac) and open source
SciTE is written in C++, with lot of contributors, both to the core and to the numerous lexers.
Pro GUI
Has a simple graphical user interface
Cons
Con Lacks file preview
There's no file preview in Syntaxic when selecting a file in the file tree.
Con Can't load binary files
An error results when you try to load a binary file in Syntaxic.
Con Can't switch syntax highlighting on the fly
Con Non-intuitive controls.
For example, you can only move tabs inside of group, not to other groups, or to a new window by dragging and dropping.
Con Not free
Syntaxic needs a license code to work which costs $20 until version 1.0 hits, and once it does it will be $35.
Con Hard to config
The configuration is mainly a file-based config, which can be unintuitive and difficult to use for new users.
Con Missing file browser
SciTE's greatest weakness is perhaps the file browser. It does not really have one, just a poor substitute which works a little bit like a terminal window with ls
or dir
commands to show the files in a directory.
Con Customization
No extensions, Themes.