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

[- Tethys]

On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 4:01 PM, general_email at technicalbloke.com
<general_email at technicalbloke.com> wrote:

> I mean I can understand why people NEED terminal based editors,
> just not why they would CHOOSE them when they have to option to
> use a GUI editor

Thus speaks a man who hasn't bothered to learn to use emacs or vi
properly. For me, the opposite is true. Why would anyone voluntarily
choose a GUI editor when better terminal based editors exist? OK, if
you're stuck on a Windows box without net access, then you have to make
do with what you've got, but that's about it. I can't work out if you're
just trolling or genuinely ignorant. The reason people use terminal based
editors is simply that they're usually much more powerful than their
GUI counterparts[1]. If someone designed a GUI editor that was better
at editing text than the popular terminal editors, I'm sure it would enjoy
huge popularity. But the fact is, they haven't. A subjective claim, I know,
but one I'm happy to make, given the available evidence.

Plus, of course, as others have implied, your GUI editor suddenly
becomes less than useful when you're logged in on a serial console.

Tet

[1] Mostly. Both vi and emacs have graphical variants, complete with
    menu bars and other such frippery, should you wish to use them.

-- 
The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to
understand the exponential function -- Albert Bartlett
-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug