On Sat 2008-08-30 17:52, Karolina Lindqvist wrote: > lördagen den 30 augusti 2008 skrev Alessio Bolognino: > > > > This might end up in a flamwar, but if we have to remove one editor I > > > would vote vor vim and keep nano. [... more nonsense ] > > > > vvvvvvvvv > > ************* > > ======================> * THIS * <================================ > > ======================> * IS * <================================ > > ======================> * MADNESS! * <================================ > > ************* > > ^^^^^^^^^ > > > > :%s/Pierre Schmitz/Wuss Infidel/g > > :wq! > > Please not vim, since if you don't know vim, you very fast get stuck. I just > installed and tried vim, and first it beeped on any key pressed. Then somehow > it stopped, and I could not exit instead. I tried CTRL-C CTRL-C...., and it > said ":quit to exit", but it did not work either. So "killall vim" was the > way to exit. Yes, madness is the right word. > > nano is more logical. Everything you type inserts, and i has a menu at the > bottom always. So you can figure out he first time. > > vim is a speciality editor, since you need to know it to use it. emacs is > similar there. Both require you to learn it to do even simple things. And > when installing a system, you need something so that you can edit the files > to get started. For a novice there should be an editor that is > self-explanatory, and it appears that nano can work there. > > But then I don't care since I anyway do: > pacman -Rs vim nano Well, I was just trolling; it's very likely that both nano and vi(m) will stay in base, so this discussion doesn't make sense, but vi is not just "an editor", it's the standard UNIX editor. -- Alessio (molok) Bolognino Please send personal email to themolok@xxxxxxxxx
Attachment:
pgpZMKyNKYkhX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
