Path: utzoo!utgpu!utstat!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ukma!rutgers!att!ihlpb!gregg
From: gregg@ihlpb.ATT.COM (Wonderly)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Re: UNIX needs a real text editor
Message-ID: <9844@ihlpb.ATT.COM>
Date: 13 Mar 89 14:31:21 GMT
References: <9059@claris.com>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories - Naperville, Illinois
Lines: 26

From article <9059@claris.com>, by krazy@claris.com (Jeff Erickson):
> 
> That's on of the main advantages (I think) of emacs: I can customize it
> to my heart's delight.  I can make any key do anything.  If I don't like
> something, I can change it to something I do like.  I don't know how many
> times I've wanted to do that with other text editors/word processors!!
> 
> Having been spoiled by emacs, I really dislike vi.

And what happens when you sit down to help somebody with something and they
don't have *macs set up the way you do?  Can you shift gears and learn their
brand of mappings in short order?  If so, you could probably learn vi or
the standard mappings for *macs as well instead of working yourself into a
state of dependence on something that is so incompatible with other
environments.  Seriously, I thought it was common knowledge that right
or wrong standard ways and methods yield common knowledge and higher
productivity!  That is precisely why you won't see me using zillions of
aliases and shell scripts.  I have a few, but just enough to get by, like
alias ls="ls -CF".  If a tool doesn't do the right thing to begin with,
I find it hard to believe that the tool is worthy of being called a tool!
The 'right thing' is hard to define, but certainly the fact that so many
people change and add mappings to *macs says something!

-- 
Gregg Wonderly                             DOMAIN: gregg@ihlpb.att.com
AT&T Bell Laboratories                     UUCP:   att!ihlpb!gregg