The very first text editor 3661
I'm not sure mentioning the Editor Wars is quite the same thing as expressing a desire to fight one. IMO, vi and emacs users should be banding together against the common enemy rather than continuing to fight each other. Sort of a :-). Anyway, can we have a truce while you explain a few things, maybe ....
Can you clarify what you mean here by "gets all confused"?
So, you've tried what I called the other major player (sort of -- vim is not exactly vi, but I doubt that the ways in which it's "vi improved" would matter to you) and found it wanting. Fair enough!
About inconsistencies and bugs, hm, I guess I don't notice the inconsistencies any more, and in truth I don't remember ever running into bugs with a vi implementation. I guess it *could* be selective memory, or maybe by the time I encountered vi it wasn't as buggy as the version(s) you've used??
Roland Hutchinson) writes: I get sick just thinking about it. But to go back far enough...
On 18 Jun 2006 21:39:46 GMT in alt.folklore.computers, When I taught some introductory courses, standard documentation, formatting, layout, comment, compilation, end, and submission requirements were specified; email or floppy media submissions were accepted, and the...
I guess it would further spoil the editor-wars fun for me to say that I could probably easily have become an emacs user at a couple of points, but at one of the decision points vi seemed to be more consistent across different platforms, and at the other I had a lot of hours invested in vi already and discovered that vim seemed to provide a lot of the things that made emacs seem more attractive.
snip Ah. Again, "95% chance of working" isn't my experience, but whatever. There *are* some quirks in the traditional Unix toolkit...
-- B. L. Mbuttingill ObDisclaimer: I don't speak for my employers; they return the favor.
The very first text editor 3662
Alt Folklore Computers from Newsgroups