Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 13:19:34 -0400 (EDT) From: Jamie Bowden <bowden@cs.odu.edu> To: Paul Richards <p.richards@elsevier.co.uk> Cc: "Stephen P. Butler" <stephen@dcs.rhbnc.ac.uk>, mikee@sys8.wfc.com, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: editors Message-ID: <Pine.3.91.960524131437.12541A-100000@hurricane.cs.odu.edu> In-Reply-To: <199605241423.PAA11414@cadair.elsevier.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 24 May 1996, Paul Richards wrote: > number of people also hate it because it's moded but that's personal choice. > The huge number of people who like vi expect it to be the default editor in > any unix system because it always has been. ed is the only editor guarateed to be there. I use vi, and emacs both, couldn't live without either, but they don't have to be there. > vi really isn't any harder to learn *properly* than emacs or pico. What you > and most people have been talking about is how quickly you can do the > *most minimal* tasks, such as change a few words and save the file. What's > good about an editor like vi (or emacs) is that for serious development you > need far, far more functionality and they provide it whereas the editors that > take only a few minutes to learn the basics of do not. You have to invest > time to learn how to use a complex tool but you reap the benefits later. No, it's no more difficult than Wordperfect, or Word, and their cryptic calls. New users weren't born with knowledge of any of it. WP and Word at least have help functions, vi has no such thing. Pico is a piece of cake. Let the newbies use it by default. When it doesn't suit the task, they will move on to vi, emacs, jed, jot, whatever, but their is no reason to dump them in an unfamiliar, hostile environment, with no chance right from the start. Jamie I have my finger on the pulse of the planet.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.3.91.960524131437.12541A-100000>