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

[William Park]

On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 09:01:54PM +0000, Christopher Browne wrote:
> On 8/24/07, Lennart Sorensen <lsorense-1wCw9BSqJbv44Nm34jS7GywD8/FfD2ys at public.gmane.org> wrote:
> > 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"...

Vim is superset of Vi, which can be seen by moving ~/.vimrc to something
else.  "Vi" really shines when used for command-line editing, especially
on slow remote terminal.

-- 
William Park <opengeometry-FFYn/CNdgSA at public.gmane.org>, Toronto, Canada
BashDiff: Super Bash shell
http://freshmeat.net/projects/bashdiff/
--
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