🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <QZ.I.Bggpc2@ficc.uu.net> peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes:
>> Please, no!  Aaaaargh!  vi has the most baroque command syntax of any
>> screen editor I know.  Let's not do anything to propagate it!
Thank you for that well thought out and thought provoking sediment[sic].
You are obviously well versed in the rhetoric of persuasion. :-)

>While there are valid reasons to complain about VI, the command syntax is
>not one of them. The limited macros, all the confusing shortcuts, and the
>heavy line-orientation are problems. The command syntax, which is almost
>universally <count>command<range>, is not. In fact, it's cleaner than the
>comand structure of any other screen editor I've seen yet. Certainly it's
>better than Emacs' ad-hockery.
True.  Sadly this syntax isn't more consistent within vi (like '~') but
it's the exception rather than the rule.  I would hope things would
evolve towards being more internaly consistent.

The use of "baroque" to describe a command syntax is kind of baroque
in itself.  Isn't it kind of neat the way that works.

                      `
viva la vi --  guerre a outrance         :-)

-- sanders
Reply-To: cs.utexas.edu!ibmaus!auschs!sanders.austin.ibm.com!sanders
"He was arrested for contributing to the the misuse of the word engineer."