Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site ssc-vax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!tektronix!uw-beaver!ssc-vax!sts
From: sts@ssc-vax.UUCP (Stanley T Shebs)
Newsgroups: net.cog-eng
Subject: Re: Intro. to net.cog-eng
Message-ID: <421@ssc-vax.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 16-Aug-83 16:47:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: ssc-vax.421
Posted: Tue Aug 16 16:47:00 1983
Date-Received: Wed, 17-Aug-83 20:46:55 EDT
References: <1962@utcsrgv.UUCP>
Organization: Boeing Aerospace, Seattle
Lines: 19

Not to pick nits (well, maybe a few) but ed is hardly a bad design.
Vi and emacs don't work very well on a hardcopy terminal, which is
what ed was originally designed for (I like it much better than
any of the other dozen-odd line editors I have used).  It has a
very orthogonal interface and is graduated in complexity, that is,
one can start work with a small handful of commands and later go on to
more sophisticated editing.  Also, while learning ed, I was able to guess
about things that I didn't know and it worked correctly.  If you
want programs to berate, try OS/360 and all of its unholy spawn,
or take cracks at PL/I, Algol68, Ada, or Interlisp.

Ed is like a hammer; you run the risk of losing credibility by
claiming it's poorly designed and needs improvement

					stan the leprechaun hacker
					ssc-vax!sts (soon utah-cs)

ps I am of course open to persuasion on these points (just hit me
on the head with a hammer!)