doorways said:And editor of "ee" is also not able to highlight?
Vim is what should be used when serious work is to be done. For editing config files, vi is a reasonable substitute. /holy_warriorUNIXgod said:vim is what most vi users use when the need for syntax highlighting is needed.
Make sure to note the "editors" part of editors/emacs, it may be as astonishing for you to find it there as it was for me. I guess they let similarly tightly focused "do one thing and do it well" editors like libreoffice/openoffice in there too.mingrone said:Well, since the holy war has started, I'm going to completely ignore the original post and mention a common alternative to vi(m), editors/emacs. This page might be useful: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Editor_war, although slightly outdated.
Most people would avoid getting caught reading dirty magazines. It takes a Radically Majorly Special person to be able to shrug off those sort of outdated social mores and just let it all hang out like that, so to speak. More power to you.A warning though... Being caught using emacs by your BSD friends will feel like being caught with a dirty magazine. You'll feel ashamed at first, but after awhile you'll stop caring what they think.
When vi loyalist O'Reilly wrote in Ask Tim that he first shifted from EMACS to vi only after his customized EMACS profile was trashed, it was one of those subtle jabs vi users like to use against EMACS.
Install editors/vim-lite. It has less dependencies.doorways said:vim a lot of sets of dependencies. (during installation)
ikreos said:Can EMACS run on a Commodore 64 (...)
Offtopic but http://aminet.net/search?query=emacsvermaden said:I remember that there is EMACS under AMIGA Workbench 2.0, but I cant tell for Commodore 64 since I did not own it.
Thanks.Originally Posted by SirDice.
Install editors/vim-lite. It has less dependencies.
vermaden said:I remember that there is EMACS under AMIGA Workbench 2.0, but I cant tell for Commodore 64 since I did not own it.
SirDice said:Install editors/vim-lite. It has less dependencies.
carlton_draught said:Vim is what should be used when serious work is to be done. For editing config files, vi is a reasonable substitute. /holy_warrior
mingrone said:Well, since the holy war has started...
Originally Posted by DutchDaemon
Ok guys, unless anyone wants to go right back to extol the virtues of clay tablets and cuneiform script I believe this thread was solved a little while ago.
I'm not sure. However on a related note, do you ever get a feeling for what a programmer must be like when you are intimately familiar with their program? Yes? That's why whenever I use vi or its descendants, I feel a profound sense of Joy. And the corollary; whenever I try and use another editor it is invariably a Joyless undertaking.doorways said:What do you suggest?
If I like vi.
It's probably a warning that this thread is getting off-topic. The current vi(m)-emacs debate doesn't have a whole lot to do with your original question any more.doorways said:What do you suggest?
doorways said:What do you suggest?
If I like vi.