Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 15:36:04 -0500 From: Zhihao Yuan <lichray@gmail.com> To: Pan Tsu <inyaoo@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [GSoC] About the idea: Unicode support in vi Message-ID: <AANLkTikLbU--J2aVa00tzxWb9GAvjfGnUGovwYaXXqhp@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <86aaglx1ow.fsf@gmail.com> References: <AANLkTintkKzW=o%2B7Q53aMSpA1mmqC7aDF1wN8zHY_Wc%2B@mail.gmail.com> <86mxkm1erm.fsf@gmail.com> <AANLkTin3Wki6bnriNgWUy5JC68MDMVc4Y444tGWcKBQ7@mail.gmail.com> <86aaglx1ow.fsf@gmail.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 11:05 AM, Pan Tsu <inyaoo@gmail.com> wrote: > Zhihao Yuan <lichray@gmail.com> writes: > >>> Why not just use "traditional vi"? >>> >>> http://ex-vi.sourceforge.net/ (lives under editors/2bsd-vi) >> >> This one lacks of many feature, compared with nvi. > > nvi also lacks some features, e.g. lisp, modelines, sourceany. > ex-vi is more lightweight > > # both built with DEBUG_FLAGS=-ggdb + mg(1) for reference > > $ du -Ah * > 1.9M nvi > 556K ex-vi > 505K mg > > $ size * > text data bss dec hex filename > 329080 1952 4528 335560 51ec8 nvi > 175675 5048 233024 413747 65033 ex-vi > 128570 9760 10184 148514 24422 mg nvi is a rewrite of the original vi, so this only shows that the new implementation uses more symbols. The actual binary results are just a 120K difference. > >> I'm not sure whether the FreeBSD system administrators (who opens 100 >> ssh sessions) agree with that to replace the nvi in base system with >> this one. > > Do they expect more features beyond POSIX vi? Like multiple windows. This has been discussed y other BSDs before. > >> However, it's source code can be a great reference for a mbyte-capable >> nvi. > -- Zhihao Yuan The best way to predict the future is to invent it.help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTikLbU--J2aVa00tzxWb9GAvjfGnUGovwYaXXqhp>