On Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 06:55:55PM -0500, David McNett wrote:
> 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
nope - I'm being reasonable, and you're not.
(I made a valid comparison & you can't find a response to it)
--
Thomas E. Dickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://dickey.his.com
ftp://dickey.his.com
