Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: DaTwinkDaddy@*****.com (Da Twink Daddy)
Subject: [OT] vi vs. emacs (was: Re: Decker arguments (kind of))
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 14:38:21 -0600
On Thursday 11 January 2007 14:17, Max Noel <maxnoel_fr@*****.fr> wrote
about 'Re: Decker arguments (kind of)':
> -- Wild_Cat
> (and Doc Nitro takes notes in his headware memory with an embedded
> version of emacs ;) )

Sacrilege! The one true editor is vi, it's son (g)vim, and the holy ed.
Three editors, three modes, three interfaces; 3x3 -- a holy trinity of
editing prowess and superiority.

--
Da Twink Daddy
DaTwinkDaddy@*****.com
ICQ: 514984 (Da Twink Daddy) YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy
Message no. 2
From: korishinzo@*****.com (Ice Heart)
Subject: [OT] vi vs. emacs (was: Re: Decker arguments (kind of))
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 12:54:28 -0800 (PST)
> > (and Doc Nitro takes notes in his headware memory with an
> > embedded version of emacs ;) )

> Sacrilege! The one true editor is vi, it's son (g)vim, and the
> holy ed. Three editors, three modes, three interfaces; 3x3 -- a
holy > trinity of editing prowess and superiority.

Yada yada yada... one ping to bring them... blah blah and in the dark
NIS bind them. :p

Sorry, could so not resist.

======Korishinzo
--ducks behind full cover





____________________________________________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
http://new.mail.yahoo.com
Message no. 3
From: toast.in.the.machine@*****.com (Mark)
Subject: [OT] vi vs. emacs (was: Re: Decker arguments (kind of))
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 12:59:40 -0800
On 1/11/07, Ice Heart <korishinzo@*****.com> wrote:
> > > (and Doc Nitro takes notes in his headware memory with an
> > > embedded version of emacs ;) )
>
> > Sacrilege! The one true editor is vi, it's son (g)vim, and the
> > holy ed. Three editors, three modes, three interfaces; 3x3 -- a
> holy > trinity of editing prowess and superiority.
>
> Yada yada yada... one ping to bring them... blah blah and in the dark
> NIS bind them. :p

Did any of those add e-HoloLISP support while I wasn't looking? Or at
least HoloScheme?

Not that it matters, I'm using eclipse more than emacs these days.

Mark
Message no. 4
From: maxnoel_fr@*****.fr (Max Noel)
Subject: [OT] vi vs. emacs (was: Re: Decker arguments (kind of))
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 23:46:07 +0100
On 11 Jan 2007, at 21:38, Da Twink Daddy wrote:

>> -- Wild_Cat
>> (and Doc Nitro takes notes in his headware memory with an embedded
>> version of emacs ;) )
>
> Sacrilege! The one true editor is vi, it's son (g)vim, and the
> holy ed.
> Three editors, three modes, three interfaces; 3x3 -- a holy trinity of
> editing prowess and superiority.

Well, the funny thing is that *I* am a vim user (when using a regular
UNIX anyway -- on OSX, nothing can beat TextMate). Go figure.

-- Wild_Cat





___________________________________________________________________________
Découvrez une nouvelle façon d'obtenir des réponses à toutes
vos questions !
Profitez des connaissances, des opinions et des expériences des internautes sur
Yahoo! Questions/Réponses
http://fr.answers.yahoo.com
Message no. 5
From: swiftone@********.org (Brett Ritter)
Subject: [OT] vi vs. emacs (was: Re: Decker arguments (kind of))
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 17:47:36 -0500
On 1/11/07, Max Noel <maxnoel_fr@*****.fr> wrote:
> Well, the funny thing is that *I* am a vim user (when using a regular
> UNIX anyway -- on OSX, nothing can beat TextMate). Go figure.

A vi user playing an emacsen character? That is _true_ roleplay.

--
Brett Ritter / SwiftOne
swiftone@********.org
Message no. 6
From: efreeman@*****.net (efreeman)
Subject: [OT] vi vs. emacs (was: Re: Decker arguments (kind of))
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 18:47:23 -0800
On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 12:38pm Da Twink Daddy wrote:
> On Thursday 11 January 2007 14:17, Max Noel wrote
> about 'Re: Decker arguments (kind of)':
> > -- Wild_Cat (and Doc Nitro takes notes in his headware memory with
an
> > embedded version of emacs ;) )
>
> Sacrilege! The one true editor is vi, it's son (g)vim, and the holy
ed.
> Three editors, three modes, three interfaces; 3x3 -- a holy trinity
of
> editing prowess and superiority.
> -- Da Twink Daddy DaTwinkDaddy@*****.com ICQ: 514984 (Da Twink Daddy)
> YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy
>
>

Not many people know this, but vi is only half the name. Remember how
vi has two modes, inspecting and editing? It came from munging two
earlier programs together, a _V_isual _I_nspector and a _L_ine
_E_ditor. They kept just the first two initials, but vi really should
be called vile.

Message no. 7
From: justin@***********.net (Justin Bell)
Subject: [OT] vi vs. emacs (was: Re: Decker arguments (kind of))
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 22:13:44 -0500
On 1/11/2007 9:47 PM, efreeman wrote:
> Not many people know this, but vi is only half the name. Remember how
> vi has two modes, inspecting and editing? It came from munging two
> earlier programs together, a _V_isual _I_nspector and a _L_ine
> _E_ditor. They kept just the first two initials, but vi really should
> be called vile.

Fewer people realise that EMACS actually stands for "Eating Memory And
Cycle-Sucking"

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about [OT] vi vs. emacs (was: Re: Decker arguments (kind of)), you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.