On Fri, May 21, 1999 at 10:51:03PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 21 May 1999 22:38:14 -0700, Chris Waters wrote: > > >I think ee is a good choice, I'm not sure it's the right choice, I'm > >not sure there is a right choice. If we put a vi on, we get a > >(probably deserved) reputation for newbie hostility. If we don't, we > >alienate all the experienced people, who expect vi to be a basic tool > >available everywhere. > > Then we should ditch the vi idea altogether. Why? Sure, *some* > experienced people will expect it. Here's one experienced person who > doesn't, however. What I *do* expect is an *easy* editor, not one that > conforms to how I work. > > It is the very fact that experienced users are, well, experienced that > they should be excluded from consideration. Anyone who, if they are like me, > can switch from joe to vim to CUA in the span of 1 minute (done it at work > more than once in the past week) can read the fscking help screen. It is the > newbies who don't know RTFM yet that need to be catered to. > > When setting up a system we don't need something that we can code the > bible in 20 different languages. All we need is this: > > Up/Down/Left/Right > PgUp/PgDn > Delete character > Backspace > Delete line > Mark a block > Cut/copy/move/paste block
But would be nice to have something that saves and exits cleanly when you ask it, i think that is the most important feature, something ae don't do all the time in his current incarnation. Friendly, Sven LUTHER
