Alessio Bolognino ha scritto:
On Sat 2008-08-30 17:52, Karolina Lindqvist wrote:
lördagen den 30 augusti 2008 skrev Alessio Bolognino:
This might end up in a flamwar, but if we have to remove one editor I
would vote vor vim and keep nano. [... more nonsense ]
vvvvvvvvv
*************
======================> * THIS * <================================
======================> * IS * <================================
======================> * MADNESS! * <================================
*************
^^^^^^^^^
:%s/Pierre Schmitz/Wuss Infidel/g
:wq!
Please not vim, since if you don't know vim, you very fast get stuck. I just
installed and tried vim, and first it beeped on any key pressed. Then somehow
it stopped, and I could not exit instead. I tried CTRL-C CTRL-C...., and it
said ":quit to exit", but it did not work either. So "killall vim" was the
way to exit. Yes, madness is the right word.
nano is more logical. Everything you type inserts, and i has a menu at the
bottom always. So you can figure out he first time.
vim is a speciality editor, since you need to know it to use it. emacs is
similar there. Both require you to learn it to do even simple things. And
when installing a system, you need something so that you can edit the files
to get started. For a novice there should be an editor that is
self-explanatory, and it appears that nano can work there.
But then I don't care since I anyway do:
pacman -Rs vim nano
Well, I was just trolling; it's very likely that both nano and vi(m)
will stay in base, so this discussion doesn't make sense, but vi is not
just "an editor", it's the standard UNIX editor.
Ouch, +1 molok for president
Imho, i think both should be in base, why remove one of them why will be
the "benefit" of push the users to edit in just 1 editor, it's
senseless, plus, some emacs lovers should hate the option that they
weren't considered in put emacs on the list, so as Pierre says, *this
will start a flamewar*, so consideer don't remove anyone.
--
Angel Velásquez
angvp @ irc.freenode.net
Arch Linux Trusted User (TU)
http://www.angvp.com
