Suzanne — Mon, 04 Mar 2002 20:52:01 +0000

There are different purposes.

If you have to change one file, as opposed to the danger of changing 500, the value of using SSI is obvious.

If you are changing things in the content, it's one thing, but to overhaul navigation and such -- one, just ONE variation in the data and boom, you have problems. Search and replace is no replacement for SSI.

Additionally, there is the ease of change -- if you have to update every page on a 300 page site and then upload ALL those changes, you have an overhead of time. If you have to change one file, and upload that one file to change all 300 pages at once, you don't.

Wil — Mon, 04 Mar 2002 14:27:28 +0000

The fastest text or data processor engine in the world is Perl

The Webmistress — Mon, 04 Mar 2002 14:26:20 +0000

Yeah, DW is the same very handy

Megan — Mon, 04 Mar 2002 14:14:52 +0000

The great thing about Homesite's search & replace, and Ultra edit's too (I think - correct me if I'm wrong on that one) is that they'll search in files that aren't even open. So that way you don't have to open all 345 files you want to check.

The Webmistress — Mon, 04 Mar 2002 13:56:17 +0000

DW also has a good find & replace system built in which I find very, very useful, especially as Taff says for common typos!!

taff — Mon, 04 Mar 2002 13:33:39 +0000

Quote: Originally posted by AdamRSX
hmm. thanx.. this is great... but if it works than why don't people use this instead of ssi?

Actually, I do

SSI isn't always an option and frankly - hardly justified for a small site. HomeSite's global search and replace comes in handy for many things that SSI wouldn't cover regardless - the realization of a persistent typo, a name change, email change, etc.

AdamRSX — Mon, 04 Mar 2002 06:44:46 +0000

hmm. thanx.. this is great... but if it works than why don't people use this instead of ssi?

mjames — Sun, 03 Mar 2002 14:26:11 +0000

Also:

HomeSite
Textpad
EditPlus

Suzanne — Sat, 02 Mar 2002 23:04:09 +0000

ultraedit.com