Le 19/07/2015 13:06, Ста Деюс a écrit :
Good time of the day, Didier.
On Thu, 16 Jul 2015 20:20:27 +0200 you wrote:
With nano, how to save and exit, etc is writen permanently on the 2
bottom lines. If you were to explain how to navigate, insert or erase
text, save and exit with vi, the screen wouldn't be large enough.
Complex editors are not suitable as fallback; this is true also for
emacs.
I think comfortability comes w/ the easy to use / common (well known
beforetimes) keys -- for nano it is written at the bottom, it is true,
but in a disaster and may nervous circumstances -- it is strains a lot
-- to see every time i need, say, to save a file -- w/ its no need
questions: are you sure? what's the name -- though file is opened and
the name is well known. -- For copy/paste procedure, to mark the text
for selection -- i even keep quite -- never got the procedures happen.
On another hand, MCedit uses just F3 key and the cursor keys -- what
can be easier to go to and fro -- for selecting?! -- One key for
cope/move the text! One key for: point the place of insertion, saving
file ! -- Again, what can be easier?!
Of course, unless you keep the life harder, or have trodden the way of
vi/emacs and would not that those disasters were in vain -- no need for
MCedit, but i see no reasons for others to live hard way. Pardon me for
a bit of personal criticism -- i would not offend any, just really can
understand the reason of existing/using such editors.
Regards, Sthu.
Hi Sthu.
I agree with you that, if an editor is as small and more intuitive
and self-explanatory than Nano, it can be a good choice. But let's not
complicate the problem by envisionning too many combinations. The
proposed alternative was:
1) have nano and vi installed and nano as the default, like in Debian
2) have vi only
I, like most others tried to remain within this alternative.
Regards,
Didier
_______________________________________________
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
