Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan ) Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc,alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Recent history of vi Date: 23 Nov 2025 17:51:18 GMT Organization: loft Lines: 56 Message-ID: References: <10fuvrq$1dt14$1@dont-email.me> X-Trace: individual.net 8caSJ0SOErb1xjT8Saonpg8nn9QSWr23ZdXzUMqMwSKcgFLNpr X-Orig-Path: not-for-mail Cancel-Lock: sha1:DmJhyhepmR580CEkgat6mmzjSjw= sha256:qkgA6YHX/lRDPdSWKRJOGQpx92twXJZWciXt6gKQ1Yg= X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test76 (Apr 2, 2001) Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.misc:77848 alt.folklore.computers:232282 In article <10fuvrq$1dt14$1@dont-email.me>, Anthk NM wrote: >On 2025-11-16, Ted Nolan wrote: >> In article , >> rbowman wrote: >>>On Sun, 16 Nov 2025 09:49:10 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >>> >>>> The Natural Philosopher wrote this post by blinking in Morse code: >>>> >>>>> On 16/11/2025 05:11, Ted Nolan wrote: >>>>>> In article <10fasl6$3p4r1$3@dont-email.me>, >>>>>> Lawrence DÿOliveiro wrote: >>>>>>> On 15 Nov 2025 18:48:51 GMT, Ted Nolan wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I find it takes a lot of munging to get vim to *really* work like >>>>>>>> vi. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> To me, that sounds like someone saying “it takes a lot of munging >>>>>>> to get a Trabant to *really* work like a Morris Minor”. I >>>can’t >>>>>>> imagine myself wanting to use either. >>>>>> >>>>>> Well, squids & kids, but my fingers do vi automatically. Anything >>>>>> else not so much. >>>>> >>>>> I find that depressing. >>>>> >>>>> I used to have to write reams of code in 'vi'. Horrible >>>> >>>> I still do. (Though it is vim). >>> >>>Back to my original statement that most people who say they use vi are >>>using vim and would be very unhappy with vi. >>> >> >> I would not. Lack of utf-8 would be an issue for some things, but >> mostly not. > >With nvi (nvi2 under OpenBSD ports) I just set at ~/.exrc > >set showmode ruler >set ts=2 >set ht=2 > >And done. A status line, the mode line, sane tabs and Unicode. 8 is the One True TS! First shalt thou type the Holy ":" Then, shalt thou count to eight. No more. No less. Eight shalt be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shalt be Eight. Four shalt thou not count, nor either count thou one, excepting that thou then proceed to Eight. Two is right out. -- columbiaclosings.com What's not in Columbia anymore..