On Sun, 4 Aug 2013 10:38:12 -0400, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote: > >>The world of text editor users is divided into three groups, those >>that believe that vi is God's gift to humanity, those that believe >>that vi is a bug, not a feature, and those that use ISPF > Vi is a study in fencepost errors.
>While I admit to using an SPF clone[1] on my PC, I believe that emacs >is more common. As to vi, it may well be The Editor From Hell, but it >is also the only editor that you can count on finding in an arbitrary >*ix system. So keep[2] vi. > I was once advised (by a UNIX sysadmin) that one must maintain proficiency in "ex" because one can not count on finding vi in an arbitrary *ix system. (Is "ex" usable in 3270 OMVS?) I was lately shocked and dismayed to discover on a certain Linux system that "visudo" dropped me into not "vi", but "nano". I can't even figure out where that's configured; perhaps it's compiled in. How could they!? On Sun, 4 Aug 2013 22:51:29 +0800, David Crayford wrote: > >You don't mention Eclipse which is free and has C/C++ editors for free. >SMB or NFS mounts make this a piece of cake. ... Which NFS clients? (Always curious.) "Eclipse" is barely in my vocabulary. I've heard it mentioned as a development tool for Java. -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
