Article View: comp.editors
Article #2734vi and emacs
From: kam hung soh
Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1991 02:15
Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1991 02:15
29 lines
1664 bytes
1664 bytes
I had been using both emacs and vi for the past eight months; emacs for
heavy duty text processing and vi for fixing small glitches. After
modifying my .exrc using tips from this newsgroup, I decided to dump
emacs and use vi exclusively.
"I need the memory and extra CPU time," I told myself.
It was a horrible experience. No multiple files / views / buffers, no
cut-and-paste between windows, no auto auto-indent for the code (yes,
vi had shiftwidth and autoindent, but it's not in the same league as
emacs), no warnings if I stuffed up my scope symbols.
So, I'm back to my old setup with emacs and vi. My opinions about the
constant vi vs. emacs war are:
1. vi is unbeatable for fixing files. It is fast and small, the cursor
whizzes along if I know what I am looking for.
2. emacs is best for large editing jobs. It has the appropriate checks
for scope symbols ( { and }, \begin and \end, etc.) and plenty of
editing functions.
Maybe what I need is vimacs ....
Regards,
------------
Soh, Kam Hung email: h.soh@trl.oz.au tel: +61 3 541 6403
Telecom Research Laboratories, POB 249 Clayton, Victoria 3168, Australia
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1991Jun1.021505.4043@trl.oz.au>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!munnari.oz.au!bruce!trlluna!titan!andromeda!sohShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!munnari.oz.au!bruce!trlluna!titan!andromeda!soh From: soh@andromeda.trl.OZ.AU (kam hung soh) Newsgroups: comp.editors Subject: vi and emacs Summary: A funny thing happened one day .... Keywords: vi emacs Message-ID: <1991Jun1.021505.4043@trl.oz.au> Date: 1 Jun 91 02:15:05 GMT Sender: news@trl.oz.au (USENET News System) Distribution: comp Organization: Telecom Research Labs, Melbourne, Australia Lines: 29