Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!bellcore!texbell!uhnix1!moray!urchin!p6.f506.n106.z1.fidonet.org!Bob.Stout
From: Bob.Stout@p6.f506.n106.z1.fidonet.org (Bob Stout)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: C Programmer's Environment
Message-ID: <15418.249F22C6@urchin.fidonet.org>
Date: 20 Jun 89 15:53:56 GMT
Sender: ufgate@urchin.fidonet.org (newsout1.26)
Organization: FidoNet node 1:106/506.6 - Fulcrum's Edge, Spring TX
Lines: 25

In an article of <15 Jun 89 19:02:00 GMT>, kenny@m.cs.uiuc.edu writes:

 >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.

Which is what I was really trying to imply in the first place. Sheesh, what  
did I start here?!? I use Epsilon (which is an Emacs derivative) where  
possible and Emacs everywhere else. When starting a new job, I walk in with my  
tape/disk/rosetta stone/etc. of EEL code and make whatever machine I'm working  
on look as much like what I'm used to as the keyboard will allow. Aside from  
merely being used to Emacs, I like its programmability and that it's usually  
available anywhere I go. *BUT* the real goal is productivity - your mileage  
may vary...