Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!ihlpf!straka
From: straka@ihlpf.ATT.COM (Straka)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Aztec C/Shell DOES HAVE a 'vi' editor
Message-ID: <6412@ihlpf.ATT.COM>
Date: 14 Oct 88 13:17:21 GMT
References: <1988Oct10.145745.2790@mntgfx.mentor.com> <967@oswego.Oswego.EDU> <5606@hoptoad.uucp> <10402@dartvax.Dartmouth.EDU> <15424@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>
Reply-To: straka@ihlpf.UUCP (55223-Straka,R.J.)
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories - Naperville, Illinois
Lines: 24

In article <15424@agate.BERKELEY.EDU| steve@violet.berkeley.edu (Steve Goldfield) writes:
|In article <10402@dartvax.Dartmouth.EDU| earleh@eleazar.dartmouth.edu (Earle R. Horton) writes:
|#|In article <5606@hoptoad.uucp| tim@hoptoad.UUCP (Tim Maroney) writes:
|#||What on Earth does vi give you that a good Mac editor doesn't?  
|#|Tags, automatic backup files.
|What Mac Editor has the complex search/replace patterns
|available in vi (by far its best feature)? If there is
|one, I'm ready for it. Right now I upload to UNIX if
|I want to do significant automatic editing of a file.

Steve hit it right on the head.  It's not vi vs. whatever.  It's a general
editor capability question:

I've never seen anything that comes even close to UNIX(R)'s regular
expression matching when it comes to complex search and replace algorithms.

Why don't ALL editors and word processors have this (UNIX's) regular
expression matching?  I know it's complex to implement, but it's extremely
powerful, and if you're going to make a standard, you can't go too wrong with
it.
-- 
Rich Straka     ihnp4!ihlpf!straka

Avoid BrainDamage: MSDOS - just say no!