> I did ask why (in the world) they used it, and they said because > it's always available by default - no install needed.
That is certainly a good reason for learning "The Editor From Hell". But isn't emacs almost as common? -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Tom Brennan [t...@tombrennansoftware.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2021 11:20 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: ISPF for mainframe Linux On 1/27/2021 6:43 AM, Steve Thompson wrote: > Then why do so many people complain about vi outside of mainframers? > Why are there other editors and even mods for vi if it is so wonderful? > That's probably true, but around 2005 when I didn't have enough z/OS work to do, I moved about half my time over to the dark side of AIX, Linux, and at least a couple of other Unixes that I can't remember - working with a bunch of folks who never touched a mainframe. I don't remember a single complaint about vi from them. I did ask why (in the world) they used it, and they said because it's always available by default - no install needed. The last time I had any major Linux editing to do (writing a relatively large system in C, multiple modules, etc.) I used the editor that comes with Microsoft Visual Studio on Win 10, with Samba setup to automatically save the files from Windows over to the Linux box. Worked great and no vi or whatever needed. Maybe that could be an alternative on the mainframe too, at least for a large project where it's worth setting up Samba. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
