Date: Mon, 15 Jul 1996 18:25:59 GMT
Message-Id: <199607151825.SAA05143@mail.enterprise.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
From: Alistair Hamilton & Alison Corfield <eurgain AT enterprise DOT net>
Subject: Re: djgpp's make and DOS - a solution

At 10:56 12.07.1996 +1000, Leathal wrote:
>> > You could always get 'vi'... :)

>*GASP* - Your not knocking vi are you?!?!?!  :)  Its actually the only editor
>I use...I happen to like it... :)

Oh, I am sorry. Do you also think that PDP-11s are really good, reliable
machines? "T'youth of t'day wi' bloody Pentiums dant know the joys of a reet
good 286." Maybe you are also a trainspotter! ... I'm sure that you can be
cured.

When I last programmed for cash (in about 1988 - Unix/C then X) those of us
who had duff terminals had to run Vi. Everyone else was using GNUEmacs. Us
poor sods got _written_apologies_ from our employer, and promices of new
terminals ASAP. I had a TVI920C that just would not cope with Emacs.
Whenever possible, we sat at our absent colleagues' desks, and lapped up
GNUEmacs - it seemed to us nothng short of remarkable.

What clinced the buying of new terminals was that the Emacs people were
producing more working code than the Vi people. Emacs is almost an IDE. Vi
has an edit-exit-compile-remembertheerrors... cycle that goes back to my
CP/M days over 15 years ago.

If you cannt use a proper IDE, I still think that Emacs has yet to be
beaten. I use MicroEMACS (provenance unknown, but non-Gnu) which does a
damned good job, won't convert your tabs, and only takes up 0,25M disc space.