Jonathan Daugherty wrote:
# I am trying to find a good shell editor. # # Which is better, vi or emacs?
Um, emacs.
He wanted a shell editor, not a replacement OS.
/oblig //don't really care ///vim>vi ////uses vim
vim == emacs
The only thing that they [vim] are missing is the OS. Vim is more like windows w/o the crashes. It's all built into the kernel. Emacs is much more like linux. It has sort of 'kernel space' and 'user space'. It's much nicer. It has a VM, and it runs a horrible language(LISP). [However, every os^h^h editor has things you dislike, afterall.] Any language named after a speech impediment can't be any good.
But, many people have learned to live with LISP and that is enough since I don't.
Emacs is not afraid of innovation. [Hence using things like 'Ctrl' "Alt/Meta", and 'shift'] Devs liked them so much, that keybindings became a perverted attempt to teach piano. This is in contrast to the stalwart vim users, stuck in 1970, prior to the invention of 'CTRL' and "ALT", etc. Oh yeah, and the arrow keys.
Finally, I think that I speak for many of us, when I acknowledge the largest vaccum in the VI world - The lack of acknowledgement of it's true spritual alignment: http://www.dina.kvl.dk/~abraham/religion/
Sincerely, Joshua
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ PDXLUG mailing list [email protected] http://lists.pdxlug.org/mailman/listinfo/pdxlug IRC: irc.freenode.net #pdxlug
