On Thu, 11 Jun 1998, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Dale Scheetz wrote:
> > ae already does this, and provides a reasonably vi ish interface, just to
> > satisfy those whose fingers are only programmed for vi.
>
> Personally, I find ae's vi-compatibility even worse then normal ae: it
> tricks me into thinking it's vi, but I can never resist using some
> vi-magic which confuses ae and gives me horrible results.
I agree. I prefer to use ae as ae to keep this clear.
I use ae, vi, ed, sed, joe, and sometime emacs every day. I also work with
software on that other os, like pagemaker and word. These are all
different and similar and confusing. I am always typing ":wq<return>" in
joe and "^k^x" in vi, both of which are non-destructive actions (in joe
you have to delete the characters you typed and in vi it laughs at you)
In ae, I always had to check the menu, until I put the emacs bindings in
place. Does vi recogize ^X^S? ;-)
>
> On my own installation disks (for local network use only) I'm putting
> vim, with almost all options turned off. This gives me a small vi
> which works even better then the original vi :)
>
Cool, we can always use a better vi ;-)
Waiting is,
Dwarf
--
_-_-_-_-_- Author of "The Debian Linux User's Guide" _-_-_-_-_-_-
aka Dale Scheetz Phone: 1 (850) 656-9769
Flexible Software 11000 McCrackin Road
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tallahassee, FL 32308
_-_-_-_-_-_- If you don't see what you want, just ask _-_-_-_-_-_-_-
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
