On Mon, 19 Mar 2018 04:06:30 +0700 Robert Elz <k...@munnari.oz.au> wrote: Robert Elz writes: > Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2018 13:47:24 -0400 > From: David Levine <levin...@acm.org> > Message-ID: <2558-1521395244.835...@bijr.xoxa.ckyx> > > > | The precendence in order from high to low is: 1) editor > | component, 2) VISUAL, 3) EDITOR. > > Actually, just to be precise, before those comes the -editor > switch to the program (comp, repl, etc). > > I too have had an "editor" component in $MH_PROFILE > for a very very long time now, and had no idea that the > default editor had been switched away from prompter > (and I am glad to hear it has been switched back) - but > I have continued to use prompter from time to time, > especially with "repl" via the -editor switch (-ed) when > the reply is going to be something very simple, like "OK" > It is much easier & quicker to drive than any real editor > for things like that. > > I also suspect that many of you do not recall using MH > back when the only real alternative editors to prompter > were not vi or emacs (or semi-clones to one of those) > but ed or Rand's 'e' and a few others similar (em from > QMC for example) - I don't think ex is quite as old as > MH (and vi certainly is not, not even as an ex cmd.)
Bill Joy wrote vi in 1976 while at UCB. I believe MH came later. Initially I used vi and Mail but later switched to e and mh -- may be because @ Fortune we now had Dave Yost and Rick Kiessig they'd both worked at Rand and on at least the Rand Editor. From what I recollect, more people used Mail than MH and I believe the $EDITOR/$VISUAL convention for calling an editor was well established. But it is possible MH picked this up much later. -- nmh-workers https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers