Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 13:55:21 -0500 From: Greg Lehey <grog@mojave.sitaranetworks.com> To: Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net>, James A Wilde <james.wilde@telia.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Programmers' editor? Message-ID: <19991124135521.44585@mojave.sitaranetworks.com> In-Reply-To: <19991124103253.B2554@orion.ac.hmc.edu>; from Brooks Davis on Wed, Nov 24, 1999 at 10:32:53AM -0800 References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.9911231240360.4557-100000@fw.wintelcom.net> <00e101bf3681$44cb04a0$8c0aa8c0@hk.tbv.se> <19991124103253.B2554@orion.ac.hmc.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wednesday, 24 November 1999 at 10:32:53 -0800, Brooks Davis wrote: > On Wed, Nov 24, 1999 at 02:39:01PM +0100, James A Wilde wrote: > >> And I don't really think vi is crap. It's just that the only thing >> less intuitive in its natural state than vi is probably emacs. <ducks >> and moves out of the war zone> <grin>. > > You aren't going to get any argument from me there. ;-) OK, I've said my piece here, and I disagree entirely. But it's not up to me; I've been using Emacs and similar editors for 20 years. The real question is: what do newbies think? Anybody want to comment? Also, Brooks, have you *used* Emacs? Recently? If so, I'd like to know what you consider non-intuitive. > Actually, if you're going to spend much time in UNIX, you should at > least have basic proficiency with vi since it's always there and > emacs may not be. There I agree entirely. I do use vi for exactly this reason. Greg -- When replying to this message, please copy the original recipients. For more information, see http://www.lemis.com/questions.html Finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19991124135521.44585>