> > <sigh>Arguing over editors is *such* a waste of time. There's no > disputing taste.
Not arguing... questioning, wondering why the 'powers that be' use it ;-) If I'm going to waste (read as curse ;-) tens of hours to be as efficient as I am in other editors I use, I have to get a hint of why I'd want to agravate myself on the short term. :-) I have used vi in the past and altough tell me its superior, I've yet to see anyone actually using it properly, even after a while. thanks for all answers, even those that are yet to come. I'm not saying utra edit pisses further than vim... I'm trying to see what color vim's pee is ;-) sorry about that weird methaphor about the 'ol pissing contest ;-) > <grin> > The vim style of modal editing is ancient yes. But hugely efficient > and extendable. noted, thanks :-) > The lisp style of treating data and code the same wasy is ancient > yes. But hugely efficient and extendable. is the lisp way of thingking really older than its peers? I thought lisp was one of the more modern approaches to handling computing problems... as is reflected as how everyone (newer compilers and languages) is trying to get into that select club > ------------------ > | Rebol uses it. | > ------------------ And that's why I use it too :-) > > tim > (Has used 'em all) MAx (Is coding one ;-) -- To unsubscribe from this list, just send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe as the subject.
