Re: A83: Re: OT: emacs...

To: assembly-83@lists.ticalc.org
Subject: Re: A83: Re: OT: emacs...
From: Daniel M Church <dchurch@mbhs.edu>
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 09:58:21 -0500 (EST)
In-Reply-To: <SIMEON.9911040926.A@pc53.mstore.CEE.HW.ac.uk>
Reply-To: assembly-83@lists.ticalc.org


> > I may spend some time and learn it sometime.  It does seem to have a ton of
> > features, but I'm more of a fan of Windows style editors.  For now in Unix,
> > I use pico, it's pretty nice :)  When doing real coding, I prefer VC++ or BB
> > (meaning programs I will use, not simple ones for class).  But I guess it's
> > all personal preference.  I am very impressed that all that stuff works as
> > well as it does over telnet, and so fast (heh, though, the default shell
> > doesn't like backspace...have to use bash).  VC++ over telnet...lol.
> > 
> > > If you want intuitive, you can use xemacs.
> > 
> Vi! (Vi!, Vi!)
> What about Vi!?
> 
> You can get Vi for almost all platforms (iv'e even got
> a version for my dads Psion...;). 
> It is only a text editor (i find emacs could do practically 
> anything these days - making it a bit cumbersome) 
> And its really nice and easy to use. Well, ok, its a bit
> crypic to start off with, but well worth it...

Cryptic is right... but one thing that I like about vi and me (microemacs)
is that they don't take up much room for status lines... 1 for vi, 2 for
me, which is really helpful on a 24-line screen.

     Daniel Church      |  "War doesn't determine who is right-
     ___---^---___      |   only who is left."
    dchurch@mbhs.edu    |  -anonymous

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GCS/M/S/MU>AT d-(+)(x) s++:- a16@ C++(+++)>++++$ UL++++ P+ L+++(++)>++++
E W+>++ N+ o? K? w(---) !O !M(--) V? PS+(++) PE(--) Y? !PGP>+ t+ 5 X()+
R>+ tv+() b+(++)>+++ DI++>++++ D++ G+>++ e-(*)>++ h!>>-(---) r+>++ y>+
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

References:

A83: Re: OT: emacs...

From: <B.J.Ellis@hw.ac.uk>