Am Freitag, 28. November 2003 21:21 schrieb Maxim Olivier-Adlhoch: > > <sigh>Arguing over editors is *such* a waste of time. There's no > > disputing taste. > > Not arguing... questioning, wondering why the 'powers that be' use it ;-) >
I don't wonder why. If something can something vi can't, this powers teach it. But i wonder how. :) > If I'm going to waste (read as curse ;-) tens of hours to be as efficient > as I am in other editors I use, I have to get a hint of why I'd want to > agravate myself on the short term. :-) > > I have used vi in the past and altough tell me its superior, I've yet to > see anyone actually using it properly, even after a while. > > thanks for all answers, even those that are yet to come. > > I'm not saying utra edit pisses further than vim... I'm trying to see what > color vim's pee is ;-) > > sorry about that weird methaphor about the 'ol pissing contest ;-) > > > <grin> > > The vim style of modal editing is ancient yes. But hugely efficient > > and extendable. > > noted, thanks :-) > > > The lisp style of treating data and code the same wasy is ancient > > yes. But hugely efficient and extendable. > > is the lisp way of thingking really older than its peers? I thought lisp > was one of the more modern approaches to handling computing problems... > Dates back to 195* IIRC. google>> lisp history == http://www8.informatik.uni-erlangen.de/html/lisp/histlit1.html Some things are modern for a very long time ;) > as is reflected as how everyone (newer compilers and languages) is trying > to get into that select club > > > ------------------ > > > > | Rebol uses it. | > > > > ------------------ > > And that's why I use it too :-) > > > tim > > (Has used 'em all) > > MAx > (Is coding one ;-) -Volker -- To unsubscribe from this list, just send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe as the subject.
