On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 11:05 AM, Pan Tsu <iny...@gmail.com> wrote: > Zhihao Yuan <lich...@gmail.com> writes: > >>> Why not just use "traditional vi"? >>> >>> http://ex-vi.sourceforge.net/ (lives under editors/2bsd-vi) >> >> This one lacks of many feature, compared with nvi. > > nvi also lacks some features, e.g. lisp, modelines, sourceany. > ex-vi is more lightweight > > # both built with DEBUG_FLAGS=-ggdb + mg(1) for reference > > $ du -Ah * > 1.9M nvi > 556K ex-vi > 505K mg > > $ size * > text data bss dec hex filename > 329080 1952 4528 335560 51ec8 nvi > 175675 5048 233024 413747 65033 ex-vi > 128570 9760 10184 148514 24422 mg
nvi is a rewrite of the original vi, so this only shows that the new implementation uses more symbols. The actual binary results are just a 120K difference. > >> I'm not sure whether the FreeBSD system administrators (who opens 100 >> ssh sessions) agree with that to replace the nvi in base system with >> this one. > > Do they expect more features beyond POSIX vi? Like multiple windows. This has been discussed y other BSDs before. > >> However, it's source code can be a great reference for a mbyte-capable >> nvi. > -- Zhihao Yuan The best way to predict the future is to invent it. _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
