Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!cornell!uw-beaver!fluke!mce
From: mce@tc.fluke.COM (Brian McElhinney)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Aztec C/Shell DOES HAVE a 'vi' editor
Message-ID: <5648@fluke.COM>
Date: 20 Oct 88 21:29:39 GMT
References: <1988Oct10.145745.2790@mntgfx.mentor.com> <967@oswego.Oswego.EDU> <5606@hoptoad.uucp> <10402@dartvax.Dartmouth.EDU> <15424@agat <6412@ihlpf.ATT.COM> <4704@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU>
Sender: news@tc.fluke.COM
Followup-To: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Organization: SRS Recursive Software, Castrovalva, WA
Lines: 23

In article <4704@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU> dorourke@polyslo.UUCP (David M. O'Rourke) writes:
>  After learning MPW they say it's at least as GOOD, if not better in many
>area's.  So far no one has mentioned a feature of any Unix editor that's not
>availible in MPW.

MPW is much more like emacs than it is like vi.  And there are a lot of
additional, and very useful, features in GNU Emacs: multiple views of the same
file, tags, a byte-compiled/interpreted LISP (MPW does have Yet Another Shell
"Language"; wonderful), arbitrary key bindings on a per file basis, smart
language modes (great for programming languages), paragraph filling, outlines,
a go-to-the-next-compile-error that doesn't get confused when you added lines
fixing the previous bug.  And already implemented and working too, not
something left as an exercise for the programmer.

Then there are the missing features you can blame on MacOS limitations.  Like
editing your documentation while a compile is running.

MPW has its strengths when compared to other Macintosh environments, but let's
not get carried away with it!


Brian McElhinney
mce@tc.fluke.com