Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 10:06:40 +0100 From: Matthias Buelow <token@wuff.mayn.de> To: Edward Kovarski <edwardk@digitalized.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Programmers' editor? Message-ID: <19991126100640.A16398@wuff.mayn.de> In-Reply-To: <873dtucyvp.fsf@nyctereutes.digitalized.com>; from Edward Kovarski on Thu, Nov 25, 1999 at 11:35:54AM -0500 References: <009901bf35ee$d892ef60$8208a8c0@iqunlimited.net> <Pine.BSF.4.21.9911231240360.4557-100000@fw.wintelcom.net> <19991123153032.60087@mojave.sitaranetworks.com> <19991123211822.B2618@strontium.scientia.demon.co.uk> <19991123181858.20266@mojave.sitaranetworks.com> <199911241641.KAA26946@chiba.3jane.net> <873dtucyvp.fsf@nyctereutes.digitalized.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Edward Kovarski wrote: >Speaking of overkill. I would still recommend that most users start out >with the bundled vi editor. It doesn't offer any of the extensions that >VIM has but at least it will give you a base of knowledge that applies This is plain wrong. Some of the extensions of vim over the Joy/Horton vi have pendants in nvi, like multiple buffers / splitted screens, ruler, filename completion (which works better than in vim, imho) and (admittedly not very verbose) help (looks more like the builtin command overview in vim 3.0 did). The difference is mostly that nvi aims to be an exact reimplementation of the original vi plus some few useful extensions (if you read the source you will find many comments that discuss vi vs. posix behaviour and explain the decision made by Mr. Bostic for nvi) while vim is more like a feature vault, trying to satisfy the many wishes users bring in from their experience with other editors. mkb 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?19991126100640.A16398>