On Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 23:56, will trillich wrote: > On Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 12:51:24PM -0500, Jeff Howie wrote: > > I cut my teeth on vim (4.x or so). and haven't looked back. > > > > On Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 11:59:06AM -0500, will trillich wrote: > > > emacs fans, please turn the other cheek-- > > > how does vim compare to elvis? which is the resource hog? > > > > Not sure about that, but I would assume that vi(elvis) would be on > > the leaner side (less features = smaller footprint?). > > according to packages.debian.org/vim: > > stable 18% vim 5.6.070-1 (309.4k) > Vi IMproved - enhanced vi editor > > according to packages.debian.org/elvis: > > stable 17% elvis 2.1.4-1 (493k) > A much improved "vi" editor with syntax highlighting. > > elvis's blue suede shoes look more piggish than vim's. nearly > by a factor of 2? or is it just docs?
If you want vim to be really useful you need the vim-rt package as well. I suspect that tips the balance. Cheers, Pann -- geek by nature, Linux by choice L I N U X .~. The Choice /V\ http://www.ourmanpann.com/linux/ of a GNU /( )\ Generation ^^-^^