Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!lll-winken!uunet!zephyr.ens.tek.com!tektronix!sequent!cseaman
From: cseaman@sequent.UUCP (Chris "The Bartman" Seaman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: HEY- editor wars!
Keywords: editor
Message-ID: <51896@sequent.UUCP>
Date: 30 Jan 91 17:57:33 GMT
References: <1991Jan28.165534.110@convex.com> <1991Jan29.140613.20469@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG>
Organization: Sequent Computer Systems, Beaverton, OR
Lines: 70

xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) writes:
< 
< Well, you had the right idea, but the wrong example; you just want to
< compare fixing up an error far enough back that you don't want to type
< all the stuff between over again.
< 
< In emacs, this is:
< 
<    mark current spot
<    navigate to error
<    remove error with backspace
<    type correction
<    return to mark
< 
< while in vi, it is:
< 
<    change mode to control mode
<    mark current spot
<    navigate to error
<    remove error with "x"      \
<    change mode to insert mode  >-- these can sometimes be replaced by:
<    type correction            /      change mode to substitute mode
<    change mode to control mode       type correction
<    return to mark
<    change mode to insert mode

This is not very accurate.  For me, the three steps you stated could
sometimes be combined are ALWAYS combined, and neverdoes it take more
than 3 keystrokes to delete the offending text and begin insert mode.
Admittedly, emacs users don't have the 'change to control/insert mode'
step, but this is only a single, unmodified (unshifted, un'meta'ed)
keystroke.

< which is what emacs users don't like about vi, while what vi users
< don't like about emacs is the more primitive navigation tools.  Of
< course, if you have an emacs point and shoot mouse interface, you
< are even further ahead of the game, presuming you like to use a mouse
< while editing (I hate it).

Actually, a well-implemented mouse interface for an editor can be
quite nice.  I like the ability to drag-select a block of offending
text, and simply start typing, having the new text replace the entire
selected block.

< > However, I stand by my assertion that it is just as inefficient to
< > have to switch modes for [most] editing and switch again for text
< > insertion, as it is to have to hold down a <CTL> key for editing
< > commands in emacs.

This is (again) a matter of personal taste and style.  Having been
a vi user for seven years, I find that I am quite proficient and
pleased with the performance it provides.  I think it would behoove
us all to remember that editors are TOOLS, not RELIGIONS.  Use
the tool that does the job, and feels comfortable in the process.
Don't, however, try to tell me that the tool I have chosen is
the wrong tool for me to use.

< Oh, probably a lot worse, though emacs users tend to be able to stand
< supported by their left pinky alone after a while.

Can I quote you on that? :-)

Regards,
Chris

-- 
Chris (Insert phrase here) Seaman |    ___-/^\-___          qatul batlh.
cseaman@gateway.sequent.com <or>  |  //__--\O/--__\\        qatul Huch.
...!uunet!sequent!cseaman         | //             \\       qatul roj.
The Home of the Killer Smiley     | `\             /'