Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rphroy!caen!uwm.edu!bionet!agate!stanford.edu!leland.Stanford.EDU!jln
From: jln@leland.Stanford.EDU (Jared Nedzel)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer
Subject: Re: editor
Message-ID: <1991Apr11.211033.14856@leland.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 11 Apr 91 21:10:33 GMT
References: <1991Apr10.131643.16038@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu> <1991Apr10.184259.2993@demott.com> <106457@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu>
Organization: AIR, Stanford University
Lines: 20

In article <106457@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> krouse-p@liter.cis.ohio-state.edu (Pierce Krouse) writes:

>Hmmm .. not one to knock Epsilon, having never used it, but BRIEF will do all
>the things you mention above.  How is Epsilon better?  Maybe I misunderstand
>what you are saying in the features list above.  I'm just curious as to the
>differences that must exist.

Epsilon is emacs-like.  Consequently, you can control the cursor motions
without having to move your hands from your typing position, whereas with
brief, you end up moving your right hand over to the cursor pad and then
having to re-align your right hand with the keyboard.  In Epsilon (or emacs),
you use commands like c-f (control-f) to go forward, c-d to delete, etc.
This takes some time to learn, but can be quite efficient after you've 
learned it. (Of course, you could probably customize Brief to behave
similarly to many emacs commands.)


-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Jared L. Nedzel  nedzel@cive.stanford.edu   jln@portia.stanford.edu