When comparing Bluefish vs Textadept, the Slant community recommends Textadept for most people. In the question“What are the best programming text editors?” Textadept is ranked 24th while Bluefish is ranked 25th. The most important reason people chose Textadept is:
You can write plugins pretty easily. [Here](http://foicica.com/textadept/api.html) is the API doc, quite compact. [Here](http://foicica.com/hg/ctags/file/a1a51a95b899/init.lua) is a module which adds a support for ctags.
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Bluefish highlights matching blocks for start and end markers (for both brackets and tags).
Pro Emmet support
Support Emmet or Zen Coding.
Pro Auto-completion and auto-tag-closing
Pro Light and fast
Bluefish starts really quick (even on a netbook) and loads hundreds of files within seconds.
Pro Very powerful search and replace
Bluefish supports Perl Compatible regular expressions, sub-pattern replacing, and search and replace in files on disk
Pro Has both GUI and TUI
Both text and GUI versions behave mostly the same, just the way notepad users would expect it to.
Like shift+arrows - select, Ctrl+c - copy, Ctrl+o - open a file.
Pro Small and portable
Has very few dependencies, and very small footprint. Can be copied to a new system in a moment, unpacked and be at your service.
Has a built-in lua engine.
It's available for Windows, Mac and Linux.
Does not have an IRC channel or some kind of forum where a community of developers/plugin writers could evolve around. Has a mailing list which is said to be active but that does not feel that attractive.