From: Leath Muller Message-Id: <199607152316.JAA17009@gbrmpa.gov.au> Subject: Re: djgpp's make and DOS - a solution To: eurgain AT enterprise DOT net (Alistair Hamilton & Alison Corfield) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 1996 09:16:31 +1000 (EST) Cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com In-Reply-To: <199607151825.SAA05143@mail.enterprise.net> from "Alistair Hamilton & Alison Corfield" at Jul 15, 96 06:25:59 pm Content-Type: text > >*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. Hmmm...I dont think so...I used Emacs at uni, and I also used MicroEmacs on my Amiga...I still prefer vi... > 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. It depends on what you like... :) > 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 the Emacs people can produce better working code, maybe its a show of the quality of the vi programmers...the guy I live with has a degree, and he uses Borland with its flash IDE (I used it before I used DJGPP). It took him longer to learn how to open a window in 95 WITH a book using the dialog editor, than it took me to write and convert a blit routine into asm under DJGPP with vi. The editor, IMHO, has very little to do with it! > 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. I was using Borlands IDE before vi, is that acceptable? :) Each unto his own... Leathal.