On Thu, Jan 01, 2015 at 10:41:22PM -0600, Rob Landley wrote: > On 01/01/2015 01:04 PM, dmccunney wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 1, 2015 at 1:39 AM, David Seikel <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> I have a simple test to decide if I like an editor as a result of these > >> decades of random editor usage. If I can't sit down with the editor > >> and figure out how to do basic editing and saving in less than a > >> minute (sans documentation), then in my opinion it's a crap editor. > >> Both TECO and vi fail this test miserably, though oddly enough I have a > >> soft spot for TECO. > > > > These days, the general assumption is that you can open a file in an > > editor with "<editor> <filename>", and that once up, cursor keys can > > be used to move around in the file and that text can be added where > > desired by typing it at the cursor location and deleted with Backspace > > or Delete keys. > > > > Vi originated in the days when some of those assumptions might not be > > true. Some early terminals on Unix systems didn't *have* cursor keys > > or F-keys. The vi command set and separation between input and > > command modes was a result. > > Indeed. > > However, ubuntu's decision to only allow you to cursor around in insert > mode when you call "vim" and to _disable_ that when you call it as "vi" > (so the cursor keys instead crap B[ and such all over your text) is > insane and stupid. And the fix is to delete /etc/vim/vimrc.tiny and make > it a symlink to just "vimrc" in the same directory. And the fact you > _need_ to do that on each new ubuntu install is just one more way that > Mark Shuttleworth is trying to cram his personal preferences down > people's throats.
Yes this is idiotic. > (Redirecting /bin/sh to point to dash instead of bash was still a dumber > move, though.) I fail to see how this was dumb. It made shellshock a non-issue and massively reduced the memory requirements (and probably increased the speed) of portable shell scripts. Bash-specific scripts should always be using #!/bin/bash. > If vi/uemacs/joe/nano are trivial extensions of the same basic > infrastructure (sort of true modulo vi command mode), I have no problem > implementing lots of sets of keybindings. But the first target is vi > because it's the only one actually in posix. My guess is that this is not so easy, and that attempting to do it this way would have a lot of subtle failures that would just annoy users. But it might be a lot less annoying than being stuck with nothing but vi... Rich _______________________________________________ Toybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.landley.net/listinfo.cgi/toybox-landley.net
