From owner-freebsd-hackers Sat May 17 14:56:17 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id OAA15701 for hackers-outgoing; Sat, 17 May 1997 14:56:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tor-adm1.nbc.netcom.ca (taob@tor-adm1.nbc.netcom.ca [207.181.89.5]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id OAA15682 for ; Sat, 17 May 1997 14:56:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (taob@localhost) by tor-adm1.nbc.netcom.ca (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id RAA13675; Sat, 17 May 1997 17:55:57 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 17 May 1997 17:55:57 -0400 (EDT) From: Brian Tao To: Charles Henrich cc: FREEBSD-HACKERS Subject: Re: vim vs. nvi? In-Reply-To: <19970516203228.50252@crh.cl.msu.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Fri, 16 May 1997, Charles Henrich wrote: > > The only thing I ran into when switching was vim uses u to undelete, > and ^R to redo, instead of the toggle as nvi operates. (Once you > get used to it, it makes more sense the way vim does it..) You could always do a ":set cp" to retain the undo/redo behaviour of the 'u' key, but then you also lose the multi-undo capability. Vim also has more window-related commands than nvi (i.e., ^W^W to cycle through windows in vim, vs. a single ^W in nvi). > I guess the only real way is to have some people in core who are vi > users to try it out and give it a spin and see what they think. I > myself am definatly sold.. If not for the syntax coloring alone.. Thumbs up from me. I can no longer function in standard vi or nvi, and vim is one of the first things I install on every new FreeBSD system I use (after tcsh, screen and ncftp2 ;-)). -- Brian Tao (BT300, taob@netcom.ca) "Though this be madness, yet there is method in't"