Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
Philipp Überbacher wrote:
It seems some people stumble upon it by accident, more or less. Just met
one on saturday. It went something like this: "what do you study?"
"computing science" "Linux user?" "Yep" *imagine funky face* "Tried to
use vi or something once for some fluid dynamics thing, we used [bla]
instead".
Just a single case and no idea how exactly he stumbled upon it, but it
was obvious that he a) associated Linux with vi(m) and b) was put off
fast by vi(m). I doubt a nicer introduction could have helped in this
case though, simply because vi(m) is a really complex beast and you
either invest time to learn what you need to learn about it or you can't
use it. There's no way around investing time with this thing.
At the other end of the scale, I've been on Linux since 1996 and
Unix systems since 1988 and I still avoid vi/vim whenever I can.
Ah, you must be an Emacs man. ;-)
I can edit config files with vi/vim, but I simply can't code with
it because it chews up too much of my mental attention doing the
basics in the damn editor.
I used to use vi so much that I tracked down a DOS version called See.
See was a tiny little executable, easy to fit on DOS rescue floppies.
--
David
gnome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
authenticity, honesty, community
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
