Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!uxc!uxc.cso.uiuc.edu!m.cs.uiuc.edu!kenny
From: kenny@m.cs.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: C Programmer's Environment
Message-ID: <4700039@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Date: 15 Jun 89 19:02:00 GMT
References: <2494481@<14810>
Lines: 17
Nf-ID: #R:<14810:2494481:m.cs.uiuc.edu:4700039:000:859
Nf-From: m.cs.uiuc.edu!kenny    Jun 15 14:02:00 1989


/* Written 10:28 am  Jun 14, 1989 by paulc@microsoft.UUCP in m.cs.uiuc.edu:comp.lang.c */
In article <14810.2494481A@urchin.fidonet.org> Bob.Stout@p6.f506.n106.z1.fidonet.org (Bob Stout) writes:
>Scrap vi and replace it with Emacs... 

Or, to generalize, scrap vi and replace it with
<substitue whatever editor you are most comfortable with
or rabidly addicted to here>.  Much religion here.
/* End of text from m.cs.uiuc.edu:comp.lang.c */

But, if you're a system administrator, *don't* force your users to
scrap their favorite environments unless it's necessary to preserve
consistency of your product.  I've had the experience of working on a
system where the sysadmin wouldn't *allow* me to use emacs (which was
on the system, but available only to users with a `documented need')
because `vi is better, anyway.'  Annoying, at best; crippling, at
worst.