vi vs Emacs debate live at GTALUG September 11 !!!

[Christopher Browne]

On 8/24/07, Lennart Sorensen <lsorense-1wCw9BSqJbv44Nm34jS7GywD8/FfD2ys at public.gmane.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 23, 2007 at 09:51:15PM -0400, Robert Brockway wrote:
> > For the September meeting I'd like to run a debate (sort of).
> >
> > The title of the debate is "Emacs is superior to vi".  This will be a
> > friendly and well natured debate on the relative merits of our favourite
> > two editors.
>
> But of course it is.  Now a real debate would be "Emacs is superior to
> vim" which would be very hard to prove. :)  Plain vi drives vim users
> nuts too.

Interestingly, I often find that I'm more apt with my use of vi than a
lot of people; they apparently got used to vim, and when put on a
Solaris or AIX box which actually has "Real vi," I know what to do,
but they don't...

Actually, I'd like to suggest that it ought NOT be obvious that vim
may be counted as an instance of vi...  If it is, then some arguments
can be made (that don't favor vi) that cannot be made if it isn't.

I don't find vi and vim to be anywhere near "the same," so it seems to
me that it's a valid position to require that this debate either be
"Emacs versus vi" or "Emacs versus vim," but not accept the ambiguity
of "anything containing vi in its name"...
-- 
http://linuxfinances.info/info/linuxdistributions.html
"...  memory leaks  are  quite acceptable  in  many applications  ..."
(Bjarne Stroustrup, The Design and Evolution of C++, page 220)
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists