Zhihao Yuan <lich...@gmail.com> writes: > If you really want to use vi in a 32MB mem environment, the ex-vi may > make sense. It consumes 1600KB memory while nvi consumes 2000KB. Note > that the ee editor uses same amount memory as ex-vi.
ex-vi memory usage can be reduced a bit, e.g. by ~20% if you drop -DLISPCODE -DCHDIR -DFASTTAG -DUCVISUAL -DMB -DBIT8 in particular multibyte support. > So basically, if no one disagree that we can drop the infinite undo, > multiple buffer, multiple window and some other potential missing > features, we can replace the nvi in the base system with ex-vi. If the intent is to make all interactive editors in base unicode aware then I wonder if you can use similar excuse when window(1) was kicked out but for missing features, i.e. use ports. As for other editors, ed(1) seems to support editing UTF-8. I've used it to read/edit cyrillic and CJK texts in single user mode before found out about ex-vi. And ee(1)... why not add unicode support there as a GSoC? _______________________________________________ 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"