Xref: utzoo comp.editors:320 comp.emacs:4109
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!mailrus!iuvax!inuxc!att!chinet!les
From: les@chinet.UUCP (Leslie Mikesell)
Newsgroups: comp.editors,comp.emacs
Subject: Re: Looking for a Simple Text Editor
Message-ID: <6419@chinet.UUCP>
Date: 29 Aug 88 14:10:33 GMT
References: <4912@fluke.COM> <2557@shark.TEK.COM> <809@kuling.UUCP> <7105@bigtex.uucp>
Reply-To: les@chinet.UUCP (Leslie Mikesell)
Organization: Chinet - Public Access Unix
Lines: 14

In article <7105@bigtex.uucp> james@bigtex.UUCP (James Van Artsdalen) writes:

>My objection to vi is not the command set, but the seemingly infinite
>number of visually indistinguishable modes.  emacs is also modal, but
>modes are visually distinguishable.  emacs also doesn't require that
>you switch modes so often either.

If you would prepend an ESC to all of the vi commands you would find that
it is no longer any more "moded" than any other editor, except perhaps
those that do not have any full screen mode.  Of course the command set
would then be more awkward to type than the usual method of hitting ESC
only when needed (or when you aren't sure..).  If you just want the mode
to be visually distinguishable, why not set showmode?

Les Mikesell