On 11-Sep-2000, Thomas Dickey wrote:
> let's see - odds are you use vim (or emacs).
> vim's 3-4 times larger than the original vi.
>
> (or are you consistent and use 'ed'?)
Thomas -- it's quite clear you're more concerned with defending your
preference than in finding the optimal solution. I'm afraid you're just
going to have to learn to live with the fact that many of us don't share
your emotional commitment to lynx.
Your analogy is strained because vim provides features well in excess of
vi, justifying the increase in size. The only "benefits" that lynx
seems to have are that it doesn't do as good a job at displaying tables as
the alternatives and that you prefer it.
Whether or not you come to grips with the fact that I find w3m and links
superior to lynx, we're now safely into off-topic land for this list.
If you're not sure yet if I've realized that you are uncomfortable with
others disagreeing with you, please reply in private email and I'd be
more than happy to continue listening to you tell me that you think
lynx is better.
--
________________________________________________________________________
|David McNett |To ensure privacy and data integrity this message has|
|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|been encrypted using dual rounds of ROT-13 encryption|
|Birmingham, AL USA|Please encrypt all important correspondence with PGP!|
PGP signature
