On Wednesday 06 May 2009 08:29:06 Uri Guttman wrote: > >>>>> "BT" == Ben Tilly <[email protected]> writes: > > BT> On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 10:01 PM, Steve Scaffidi <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On May 6, 2009, at 12:00 AM, Jerrad Pierce <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> lemme know what you think. yes, there aren't too many emacs users in > >>>> boston.pm but who knows? this could convert a few of you. > >>> > >>> You lie sir! Surely any Bob-fearing coder on the true path of hackish > >>> virtue uses the one true editor. > >> > >> Indeed, one can not deny the mighty power bestowed upon we mortals > >> when blessed with vi. > >> > >> ;-) > > BT> You fail to accept the new covenant that is vim? :-P > > the emacs spirit will smite you all with the power of stallman! > > besides, emacs has a vi mode (several i think) but does vi(m) have an > emacs mode? case settled!
Actually vim does have an Emacs mode: * http://algorithm.com.au/code/vimacs/about/ * http://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=300 It's not fully GNU/X Emacs compatible, as it does not implement Emacs Lisp etc. but it's better than nothing. However, the last release seems to be about seven years ago, which may indicate it is either unmaintained and possibly broken - or alternatively good enough as it is. I should also note that last time I checked none of Emacs vi-modes was even remotely vim-compatible, and many people are used to vim (possibly with many customisations) and not plain-ol'-vi. Regards, Shlomi Fish -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Shlomi Fish http://www.shlomifish.org/ Freecell Solver - http://fc-solve.berlios.de/ God gave us two eyes and ten fingers so we will type five times as much as we read. _______________________________________________ Boston-pm mailing list [email protected] http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/boston-pm
