Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!mordor!joyce!sri-unix!quintus!ok
From: ok@quintus.uucp (Richard A. O'Keefe)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: vi vs. emacs
Message-ID: <215@quintus.UUCP>
Date: 30 Jul 88 23:50:20 GMT
References: <16697@brl-adm.ARPA> <5824@orstcs.CS.ORST.EDU>
Sender: news@quintus.UUCP
Reply-To: ok@quintus.UUCP (Richard A. O'Keefe)
Organization: Quintus Computer Systems, Inc.
Lines: 18

In article <5824@orstcs.CS.ORST.EDU> kramerj@beasley.UUCP (Jack Kramer - OSU Gene Res) writes:
>I, and from the context of many of the messages, many others
>probably use both editors depending on the circumstances.  I use Vi for 
>quick text editing and Emacs when more power is needed but a real
>word processor isn't available or needed. (I used vi here.) Since I
>use UNIX when I have a choice, I can always count on vi being there.  

There is _one_ way to be sure you will have a particular editor available.
Take the source code with you.
Teach students about Emacs-like editors and give them a copy of Jove,
or teach them about VIle editors and give them a copy of STEVIE.

To change the subject slightly, VIle is "there" on a lot of UNIX systems,
but what do people without source do about bugs?  Which vendors are
*actively* maintaining it?  I can get the latest version of GNUmacs
without having to wait for the next release of SunOS (in fact we are
running several releases behind on that).  Is there something similar
available for VIle?  Who controls the "official" definition of VIle?
Is there one?