From: utzoo!decvax!harpo!seismo!rocheste!ritcv!mjl
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards
Title: Re: Vi/Rand Retrospective
Article-I.D.: ritcv.298
Posted: Sat Apr 16 01:25:06 1983
Received: Mon Apr 18 10:38:30 1983
References: ncsu.1172

Ok, since the vi/rand debate seems to be of monumental importance, I'll put in
my  two  cents.   Actually,  I'll  home in on the one point that seems to have
caused the most controversy--tab replacement by spaces.  I've used  a  variety
of  editors  in the 15 years I've been in the business, from Basic line number
editors to TECO to a  piece  of  junk  on  the  CDC  NOS  system  to  'ed'  to
SDS/XDS/Honeywell  Sigma 9 EDIT to the rand editor to vi (just to establish my
credentials). I have always liked editors that keep "tabs as tabs" better than
those that replace  tabs with spaces.  NOT because of the space saved; I agree
that's a red herring.  Rather, tabs are  an  extraordinarly  useful  delimiter
when  searching for and lining up columnar data (including source statements).
When I have to rearrange text, especially text whose indentation reflects  its
structure,  tabs  are much easier to work with than a pseudo-random collection
of spaces.  Keep the two concepts distinct; they serve distinct purposes.  And
if you don't want tabs, filter your file through expand(1).

Mike Lutz
allegra!rochester!ritcv!mjl