[Gllug] ed vs emacs/vi, was: ed vs emacs, was: OpenMoko Neo Freerunner

[general_email at technicalbloke.com]

Nix wrote:
> On 13 May 2009, general uttered the following:
>   
>> In the most basic case the mouse is a much faster interface for
>> highlighting chunks of text that are more than a few lines away from the
>> cursor, or more than a dozen characters into a line.
>>     
>
> If those chunks are entirely random selections of text, you may be
> right.  But in the more common case when you're trying to select, say, a
> paragraph or an expression or fourteen words or something like that,
>   

Pish, I quite commonly need to pull chunks out of the middle of a line
and other seemingly random places. What I pretty much _never_need to do
is select exactly 14 words, and if I do need the text between column 27
and 65 on the line 13 lines above the cursor it's a lot faster for me to
use the mouse than the keyboard if only because it spares me the
counting! Don't get me wrong, I do use the keyboard to do most of my
selecting but there are times (in practice many times during an average
day) where the mouse is the correct tool for the job.

>> Anyway, what's wrong with having and interface you can SEE?
>>     
>
> Nothing. Emacs and vi both have those in GUI mode (which is the default
> for Emacs if X is running). Emacs even has a option-setting thingy
> (customize) although it keeps rotting because no real emacs users use it
> very much.
>
>   
It seems we are talking at cross purposes then. I was wondering why
people would choose to use an terminal based editor over a GUI based one.

It seems that the big two old school terminal editors also exist in GUI
form these days, something I didn't know at the start of this thread.
Indeed I get the impression that most people here use the GUI versions
whenever they're practical so people _aren't_ generally choosing
terminal based editors over GUI ones except for practical purposes. That
makes sense to me now (but please feel free to correct me if any of you
do _actually_ prefer the terminal version!).

The other point I was trying to make is that, for the day to day stuff
most people need an editor for there's nothing wrong with nano (although
shift-select wouldn't hurt). Before this year the last time I used Unix
with any regularity was on HP-UX workstations in 1994 and I remember
pico as being far easier than anything else for my modest needs. I think
this is still the case.

As desktop linux grows and more people switch from shared web hosting to
cheap VPS hosting the predominant uses of a terminal based editor become
fire fighting GUI boot problems and editing the odd config file via SSH.
I see nothing wrong in having something simple and intuitive like nano
for this. Many users (and should present trends continue the vast
majority of users) need nothing more from a terminal based editor. I
appreciate many of you here are professionals and 'power users' but,
like it or not, the linux demographic is shifting and it will be far
less annoying for all of you if you accept the need for simple intuitive
tools and, dare I say it... user friendliness :)

Anyway since this thread has started I have tried to put the past behind
me and have spent a bit of time acquainting myself with Emacs and Vim,
seeing as how everyone here seem to have nothing bad to say about them
and consensus that they are veritable force magnifiers. Having duly
invested 20 minutes dicking around and glancing at the tutorials of each
I have to say...

Emacs clearly kicks Vim's ass! ;D

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