[Gllug] vi vs emacs (repeat)

[Ian Norton]

On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 11:25:01PM +0000, Craig Millar wrote:
> ok, stood here with a can of worms in the one hand and a can opener in the
> other. i know it's been debated a zillion times but i have been lurking on
> this list a while now and have, like the rest of us, formed a respect for
> certain people's opinions and an inclination to ignore those of certain
> others.
> 
> vi vs emacs - i have finally decided to familiarise myself beyond the usual
> navigational commands with one or the other. for someone who came from a gui
> background and uses kde extensively i've never had cause or motivation to do
> so before but now that i've taken up mutt as my mail client, utterly
> disillusioned with the mozilla suite and several others as mail clients, it's
> long overdue.
> 
> personally i love a good flame war so don't be bashful! or cshful or
> whatever! ;)
> 
> thanks. craig

The only thing that most of us will agree is really that:-

a. vi is installed on virtually everything and is often the only editor you 
   have to fix a really borken system

b. emacs has alot of keyboard shortcuts.

They are both excellent editors in thier own right, both are customisable, both
are very popular, Emacs's macro support goes without saying as being far more
comprehensive than vi/vim's.

both will serve you well, emacs is slightly better for programming imo
(althouth i dont use it) as it tends to give you alot of IDE like functions.

vi/vim is still pretty damn good tho, plus its alot smaller (and faster) than
emacs




-- 
Ian Norton-Badrul

-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug