Have you seen this? https://github.com/microsoft/edit

Thanks, I haven't. I am not sure it builds into a DOS EXE though, rust and all the cool stuff that is.
E: Found this fairly recent discussion elsewhere, so trying some of the recommendations there...

Just in case anyone else would find this useful:

Back in late 1970s-early80s I was doing a LOT of work on DEC VAX systems, and
became very familier with their EDT visual editor which I liked more than any
other editor I'd used. So much so that I wrote my own "EDT" which became (and
still is) the primary text editor I use:

1Use: edt <file> [c=initial_cmd -interactive_help -video_inhibit]
2
3for interactive help:   F10 'H' F10

It is *NOT* a "fancy" editor and does not have a lot of on-screen prompts or
fields. It just shows a section (25 lines) of text exactly as it will appear
in the final file - like writing on a piece of papar!

Here is the content of it's Help screen - '{}' denote key codes I had to add
for certain systems where ^(control) of special keys was not available:

1Special keys                     Commands                 Line ranges
2------------                     --------                 -----------
3PgDn  =Page forward              C =Copy line(s)          * =Current line
4PgUp  =Page backward             D =Delete line(s)        / =Entire file
5^PgUp =Start of file {F11}       F =File info             n =line # (1+)
6^PgDn =End of file   {F12}      nH =Set Htab size         0 =End of file
7Home  =Start of line             I =Insert new line(s)    = =Tagged lines
8End   =End of line               L =List (unformatted)  r,r =range to range
9F8    =Redraw screen             M =Move line(s)
10^Left =Word right    {sF3}       P =Print (formatted)
11^Right=Word left     {sF4}       Q =Quit editor
12INS   =Insert/Overwrite         QQ =Quit with no save
13DEL   =Delete character      Rfile =Read & insert file   Examples:
14BKSPC =Delete previous   S/old/new =Substitute text      ---------
15F1    =EOL display               T =Tag lines             D
16F2    =Cursor position           V =Visual mode       1,10C
17F3    =Move line to top    W[file] =Write file           =M
18F4    =Tag line(s)         X[file] =eXit/write file      0Rmy.fil
19F5    =Del to end of line    ?text =Search for text      /Wmy.fil
20F6    =Del end of line      $[cmd] =Execute OS command
21F7    =Insert deleted line  (null) =Move to line range
22F10   =Line mode command
23F9    =Re-execute command

I have ported this editor to DOS(16-bit), Windows(32-bit), various flavors of
Unix/Linux, my own DVM virtual machine, my own CUBIX (6809) OS, and others.
The source code is in C, and I've kept it very portable.

Compiled DOS/Win32 versions as well as the source code are available on my
site. There is of course much more complete documentation.

It may take a little "getting used to", but IMHO well worth it - I can't tell
you how wonderful it is to have the SAME (and capable) text editor on all the
systems I work on!

The DOS version is 11k - more capable/smaller than EDLIN(12k) and *much*
smaller than DOSs std EDIT/QBASIC(200k) - makes it very suitable to include
on test/diagnostic boot floppies. (I just looked an W98 EDIT.COM is about 70k
- presumably doesn't need QBASIC like the DOS one)

BTW/FWIW - I wrote this posting (and most of my others) in DosBox using EDT
and copy/paste it into VOGONs

In the end I settled on @boeckmann 's fork of EDIT.EXE from FreeDOS, which is a much more stable version compared to what's shipped with the OS. After running it for a few month I got used to it very much, but still was finding the color theme somewhat busy.
Luckily I was looking for a ready to use text mode UI framework with compact distribution to produce launcher for Bernewfie, and decided to look into DFlat+. As a "by product" of forking @boeckmann 's repo for that I got a new build of EDIT.EXE which sports familiar colors of MS editor, but also add couple more color themes.
Sharing for those interested: https://github.com/drivelling-spinel/dflatp-a … s/tag/edit-2026

I was thinking whether a fdos edit fork existed the other day that made it more edit.com like (after seeing slop "notepad"). Thanks!

The other new MS EDIT posted was in Rust and meant for windows10+/linux and has huge problems and isn't like Edit at all (and not very compatible with those PxPlus VGA fonts). Just MS retro clouting i felt, and as it's Satya M$ it's probably copilot slop too.

Hi, @ludicrous_peridot!
Just tried your 2026 version of EDIT fod DOS in DOSBox, but it gives some display artifacts like this:

There are similar display artifacts no matter what color palette is used. What could be the cause for this? Also, the editor does not keep its settings. Could these things be fixed (probably using some kind of ini-file for settings)?

Thank you!

P.S. So far the mentioned above AI "slop" seems like the most stable modern EDIT alternative for DOS. In general I don't like AI-generated stuff at all, but this thing is working fine.

Hello, sadly I wouldn't know what could be the cause for artifacts. Do they appear when you open a file to edit as well?

Anyway, not something that has happenned to me, but I only tried in DOSBox (DOSBox-X specifically) once for taking the screenshots. I suggest trying out @boeckmann 's own build to see if it was my meddling with DFlat+ that is the cause.

By the way, if you need to do some serious editing in DOS and not just tweak a few BAT-files, OpenWatcom' s VI is quite competent. My personal problem with it is that it quits on Ctrl+C .

PS To save setting in FreeDOS Edit one selects Save setting option from the top level menu. That's how it worked, I never changed that.

aVd wrote on 2026-03-08, 12:10:

P.S. So far the mentioned above AI "slop" seems like the most stable modern EDIT alternative for DOS. In general I don't like AI-generated stuff at all, but this thing is working fine.

It's indeed working fine. He just doesn't like AI and needs to vent that everywhere. Even by using swear words in his signature (don't know why the mods even allow that).

ludicrous_peridot wrote on 2026-03-08, 12:49:

Hello, sadly I wouldn't know what could be the cause for artifacts. Do they appear when you open a file to edit as well?

Anyway, not something that has happenned to me, but I only tried in DOSBox (DOSBox-X specifically) once for taking the screenshots. I suggest trying out @boeckmann 's own build to see if it was my meddling with DFlat+ that is the cause.

Hi,
I just tried it in DOSBox-X and there it works much better whithout those artifacts. Unfortunately in good old DOSBox 0.74-3 it glitches when I use drop-down menus or some pop-up "windows" are opened and closed.

ludicrous_peridot wrote on 2026-03-08, 12:49:

By the way, if you need to do some serious editing in DOS and not just tweak a few BAT-files, OpenWatcom' s VI is quite competent. My personal problem with it is that it quits on Ctrl+C .

Thanks for the suggestion, but I'm in search for modern lightweight DOS EDIT replacement.

ludicrous_peridot wrote on 2026-03-08, 12:49:

PS To save setting in FreeDOS Edit one selects Save setting option from the top level menu. That's how it worked, I never changed that.

I didn't knew this, I'll have to try it. I don't like FreeDOS and I don't use it since version 2. SvarDOS is better, IMHO.

Yoghoo wrote on 2026-03-08, 13:04:

It's indeed working fine. He just doesn't like AI and needs to vent that everywhere. Even by using swear words in his signature (don't know why the mods even allow that).

Hi, @Yoghoo,
Notepad for DOS is fine and I'm currently using it in DOS as an EDIT replacement with standardized keyboard shortcuts. It's just compiled from some AI-asm-like language because of... the usage of AI coding. And I treat the so called "artificial intelligence" as a tool or a package of algorithms for achieving some goals, not like "machine with intelligence" or "consciousness". You know what I mean 😉 But I really don't like the global AI-stalking on everything and everyone through all the modern "smart" gadgets . Perhaps @leileilol is a little too expressive in his signature, but I'm not the one to judge him here 😀

ludicrous_peridot wrote on 2026-03-08, 12:49:

PS To save setting in FreeDOS Edit one selects Save setting option from the top level menu. That's how it worked, I never changed that.

Just tired it and it really works and crates EDIT.CFG file. Stupid me didn't mind, that have to click on "Save options" after some changes in settings.

Even if your EDIT 2026 glitches in old DOSBox (hopefully only there and not on a real hardware and DOS), I think now I have a new favorite DOS EDIT replacement! The only thing that is not so correct is the "Color" pattern name as it is more of a gray(ish) 😀 And the name "FreeDOS EDIT" instead of "EDIT 2026". But these are just cosmetic trinkets 😀

Thank you!

P.S. And I forget again. DFlat+ library seems like an Open Watcom C alternative to Borland's Turbo Visual libraries, looks promising.

aVd wrote on 2026-03-08, 13:22:

Hi,
I just tried it in DOSBox-X and there it works much better whithout those artifacts. Unfortunately in good old DOSBox 0.74-3 it glitches when I use drop-down menus or some pop-up "windows" are opened and closed.

Well, they said so many time on this board DOSBox is not for your "business applications", I guess it's true after all. 😀

aVd wrote on 2026-03-08, 13:22:

Thanks for the suggestion, but I'm in search for modern lightweight DOS EDIT replacement.

That's roughly how I felt before having tried this version of VI, but then I tried it and was amazed as it was nothing like vi, vim or gvim I used to know 😉
But from lightweight side, svar has their own take on edit, and there is also PEdit from Goldshell, the one you can try out with DOSBox-X.

aVd wrote on 2026-03-08, 14:03:

Even if your EDIT 2026 glitches in old DOSBox (hopefully only there and not on a real hardware and DOS), I think now I have a new favorite DOS EDIT replacement! The only thing that is not so correct is the "Color" pattern name as it is more of a gray(ish) 😀 And the name "FreeDOS EDIT" instead of "EDIT 2026". But these are just cosmetic trinkets 😀

Thanks for trying it out. Before you set out doing something serious with FreeDOS Edit, though, be warned - DFlat+ has limitations when working with files in multiple directories. To put it simple - in order to access the file chosen using Open dialog, it actually changes "current directory" and "drive" to the one the file resides in. This can create confusion (when you then find your edited file not in the same directory you opened it, and the original file intact), or even some nasty stuff - when two versions of the file with the same name but from different directories get accessed. Edit shipped with FreeDOS is worse than @boeckmann's version with that regards, but I think I ran into occurrences of the issue even when using my version. So as this usually goes, "back up often, back up a lot".

Having given the warning, safe trip, and be sure to stop by and share how it went with the real PC. 😀

ludicrous_peridot wrote on 2026-03-08, 14:09:

That's roughly how I felt before having tried this version of VI, but then I tried it and was amazed as it was nothing like vi, vim or gvim I used to know 😉
But from lightweight side, svar has their own take on edit, and there is also PEdit from Goldshell, the one you can try out with DOSBox-X.

Nice! So, now I have more options for EDIT alternatives, than I expected. I totally forgot about SVED (the SvarDOS EDIT) and I'm not sure about PEdit, but for sure never heard of Goldshell.

Does "PEdit" come in form of PED.EXE file? Just to be sure it's the same, that I found on forbidden to post archive site.

Thanks for all the suggestions! I have to make a detailed comparison on all of them 😀

ludicrous_peridot wrote on 2026-03-08, 14:18:

Thanks for trying it out. Before you set out doing something serious with FreeDOS Edit, though, be warned - DFlat+ has limitations when working with files in multiple directories. To put it simple - in order to access the file chosen using Open dialog, it actually changes "current directory" and "drive" to the one the file resides in. This can create confusion (when you then find your edited file not in the same directory you opened it, and the original file intact), or even some nasty stuff - when two versions of the file with the same name but from different directories get accessed. Edit shipped with FreeDOS is worse than @boeckmann's version with that regards, but I think I ran into occurrences of the issue even when using my version. So as this usually goes, "back up often, back up a lot".

Having given the warning, safe trip, and be sure to stop by and share how it went with the real PC. 😀

Thank you for these clarifications! Good to know these DFlat+ library limitations. I'll not use it for something like serious file editing or code writing in DOS, but as an EDIT alternative with modern keyboard shortcuts 😉

Ok, PED.EXE is not "PEdit" from Goldshell, but some other very old "Pedit" from year 1990 released by a guy named Bob Foley. Tried them both, but their keyboard shortcuts are similar to the non-standard/ancient ones like those in M$-DOS EDIT. So, these don't qualify for my taste.

SVED is very simple and clean, standardized keyboard shortcuts seems to work, but there's no undo function (<Ctrl>+<Z>) and I can't figure out (at first sight) how to copy only part of the text instead of one whole line.

Yep, Open Watcom's "VI" is fine until you try to use <Ctrl>+<C> 🤣

I think I'll stay with EDIT 2026 and the AI "slop" thing 😀

Sometime ago I found SuperTED which was incredibly compact and did most basic text operations. It worked beautifully in all my systems, including my 8088 XT with monochrome display.

The only aspect of it which I have found was annoying, was that when it edited already existing files, it created an additional .BAK file. Since the assembler code was available, I just added 3 lines to delete the BAK file , and bumped version number and displayed what was modified. So if you still want to revert the .BAK file removal, you can do it. I used Borland TASM with no issues.

Find attached SuperTED v1.01a which contains the original text document, and both the .ASM and .COM files of the version I modified. At only 4,307 bytes, it is hard not to try the executable and keep it at hand.

Hi, Ignacio,
Your finding SuperTED is the tiniest alternative DOS editor so far, even smaller in size than SVED. Unfortunately supported keyboard shortcuts are program specific.

Thanks for suggestion.

aVd wrote on Today, 06:06:

Hi, Ignacio,
Your finding SuperTED is the tiniest alternative DOS editor so far, even smaller in size than SVED. Unfortunately supported keyboard shortcuts are program specific.

Hi, the source code is abundantly commented. It should be fairly easy to change keyboard shortcuts to your liking, just change the corresponding keyboard scan code. Then you just pick Borland TASM 4.x which is easy to find and free, and issue TASM /M5 SUPERTED.ASM to generate SUPERTED.MAP and SUPERTED.OBJ and finally TLINK /T SUPERTED.OBJ which should hopefully build SUPERTED.COM. It will of course, require some time to also adjust the text that reflects shortcuts, but it is a doable task if you have the spare time and will to do so.

igully wrote on Today, 16:37:

Hi, the source code is abundantly commented. It should be fairly easy to change keyboard shortcuts to your liking, just change the corresponding keyboard scan code.

Hi,
This is very good idea. But I met some problems. I looked into the SUPERTED.ASM (from your attachment) - lines 330 to 507 for the read key scan code routines and for example I can't find scan codes hex values for keys <F3> "Print" (3Dh), <F5> "Cut" (3Fh), <F6> "Paste" (40h) to reassign new hex values for standard key combos just for test. But these <F3>, <F5>, <F6> keys actually work as expected in the executable from your attached archive. I'm not into assembly, so maybe I'm doing things wrong.

And the fun continues. For the test, I just bult SUPERTED.COM using Borland's Turbo Assembler (the one from Borland C/C++ 3.1) and these <F3>, <F5>, <F6> are working as expected, so the problem is not caused by something, that's missing in the source code from your attachment.

Also, with this "tiny DOS memory model" SuperTED editor can't even open its own source code asm-file for editing 😁 I think 64KB will be the limit for the file size, if not even less by some restriction set by the code.

P.S. I think, I got it. The function keys with the missing scan code hex values are handled through "DISPATCH_TABLE". And this makes key combos even harder to be traced and redefined in the code. Seems like it will be easier for me to add more conditional jumps depending on missing key scan codes, than using this "table".

Hi again aVd,

FUNCTION_DISPATCH at line #410 sets shortcuts. The problem is that is not so straight forward, as it first defines special keys and at last (line #495), it also defines a jump table which is the one that handles those F3, F5 and F6 keys, between others. To make it easier, you could exclude those keys from the jump table and set them before the table.

In any case, you are absolutely spot on this program limitation. To handle bigger files, it would require a big code overhaul. I just use it for editing the usual average DOS things, like AUTOEXEC, CONFIG and some TXT files. For development, Unicode support, and word processing I use non-DOS software.