>>>> Well for me, it's nano. >>> >>> I'm sure it took a lot of courage to admit that in public. >>> >>> Unfortunately, we're still going to have to shun you now. >> >> I didn't say it was a useful contribution. Not sure how useful I am to >> discussions on this list anyway! :P >> I'll go back to my corner now. > > It's okay, Robert. I use nano sometimes too. Especially when I'm using > some kind of revision control, and it automatically comes up with something > to annotate the commit. Sometimes I'll go through the trouble of updating > EDITOR/VISUAL env. variables, but a lot of the time, I just don't care > enough. > > Of course the revision control is usually either CVS or SVN, depending on > the project, but that's a completely different "discussion". Again, it's a > matter of works-well-enough-for-my-purposes coupled with > don't-really-care-enough and have-other-priorities-right-now.
Actually nano works really well as a simple alternative to the vi/emacs dilemma, especially since it starts up really fast and has intelligible shortcuts (No, vi(m) shortcuts are not intelligible. Quick, yes, but not intelligible). Of course, if you're on the wrong system (ahem, *OSX*), it's misspelled as "pico" ;-). It's actually mainly why I haven't picked up much of vi (full disclosure: I was indoctrinated in emacs right around when I learned my way around linux, so that comes most natural to me anyway). -------------------- BYU Unix Users Group http://uug.byu.edu/ The opinions expressed in this message are the responsibility of their author. They are not endorsed by BYU, the BYU CS Department or BYU-UUG. ___________________________________________________________________ List Info (unsubscribe here): http://uug.byu.edu/mailman/listinfo/uug-list
