On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, darren chamberlain wrote:
> * Thomas E. Dickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-09-18 09:04]:
> > On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, darren chamberlain wrote:
> >
> > > vim has a :version command, which other vi clones don't seem to; vim
> >
> > :ve is standard.
> > (:version is also recognized by all of the vi's that I recall -
> > including elvis).
>
> OK, I stand corrected. However, :ve will still tell him whether he's
> using vim or not, eh?
yes (I haven't noticed any counter examples - its version message is
pretty verbose - even when presumably running in vi-compatibility mode,
which can be a problem in itself)
> > > with cp set will still respond to :version, while elvis will not
> > > (well, it will, but with an error ;).
> >
> > one of the annoying things about vim-users is that most of them don't
> > know much about vi, and tend to ascribe lots of things to vim that are
> > standard in vi.
>
> Hey, Sven, calm down, will ya? ;)
He's tamer than he once was (we don't often quarrel anymore - I seem to
recall this was once an issue)
> Actually, though, my experience has been the opposite: people who are
> vim users tend to think that vim features are standard vi features, and
> get upset when, say, ga doesn't do what they expect. A lot of the vi
> evangelists I know are actually vim evalgelists, and it annoys me, much
> as it (apparently) annoys you.
I do notice those ("ga" not working), but they aren't as common as they
used to be (Redhat distributes vim ;-)
> > (don't be like most vim-users)
>
> Actually, I'm not. In fact, on many of the boxen I use regularly, I'm
> not a vim user at all. I was unaware that other vi's supported :ve; I
> thought I remembered elvis, at least, not supporting it.
perhaps very old elvis (but that would be very old - 1.8 has a version
message; I don't recall what 1.7 did).
--
T.E.Dickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://invisible-island.net
ftp://invisible-island.net
