Xref: news-dnh.mv.net comp.os.msdos.djgpp:2420
Path: news-dnh.mv.net!mv!news.sprintlink.net!newsserver.pixel.kodak.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!spool.mu.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.mathworks.com!news.kei.com!simtel!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!decwrl!pacbell.com!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!sdcc12.ucsd.edu!sdcc15!wtanksle
From: wtanksle AT sdcc15 DOT ucsd DOT edu (William Tanksley)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: EMACS??
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 1995 08:40:48 -0400
Organization: University of California, San Diego
Lines: 19
References: <DFqC71 DOT H3H AT jade DOT mv DOT net>
Nntp-Posting-Host: sdcc15.ucsd.edu
To: djgpp AT sun DOT soe DOT clarkson DOT edu
Dj-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

Andreas Busse <andy AT soft-n-hard DOT de> wrote to all:
:No religion wars here, but emacs is one of the two real editors 
:of this world, namely VI and EMACS. Hard to learn, but once you're 
:familiar with one of them (ironically vi has an emacs mode and 
:emacs has an vi mode :-)) you'll never want to use any other 
:editor anymore!

I'll vouch for that.  One indicator of quality is the number of imitators
you get; Emacs leads the pack for that.  I do have something against vi,
though.  vi imitates ex, so when you say that vi is a real editor you really 
mean that ex is a real editor.  I don't dispute that.

Does vi have a compilation error-finder function?  I've got a friend that
could use it.

:Andy

-Billy
Using Jed-- a loyal imitator of Emacs.