From: janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com   
      
   On 08.03.2024 00:54, Anthony Howe wrote:   
   > On 2024-03-07 09:08, Janis Papanagnou wrote:   
   >> As I understand it nvi is just a reimplementation of classical vi.   
   >> I assume your Linux also supports vim. Is there a reason why you   
   >> prefer to use nvi?   
   >   
   > * Nvi historically accurate for the most part. [...]   
   >   
   > * Nvi's extensions do not conflict with historical/POSIX behaviour.  In   
   > particular undo/redo in vim is a pet peeve of mine, because it never   
   > works the way I expect it to work and I have lots of muscle memory WRT   
   > vi.  Keith's solution was more elegant IMO.   
      
   Hmm.., okay.   
      
   Myself I had always been annoyed by Vi's single undo toggling. Vim's   
   multiple undo (and redo) is exactly what I want.   
      
   I've read somewhere that Vim even allows to navigate undo trees, but   
   that's something I never looked into.   
      
   >   
   > * vi macros.  At the time of the POSIX standards, people had macros they   
   > relied on that needed to be portable.  I had collected for MKS's testing   
   > some interesting macro sets: vi solving a maze; Turing test; Towers Of   
   > Hanoi, maybe others.  vim broke these macros.   
      
   Oh, interesting and good to know. Have you any details what exactly   
   was the problem?   
      
   >   
   > * Don't need plugins or syntax highlighting or what ever else vim adds   
   > to the bloat.  I worked without those features for years.  For that   
   > there are plenty of other editors to try that are not Vim (or Emacs).   
      
   I worked also colorless in the past for a long time; my stance was   
   that programs and data should be well structured and formatted and   
   legibly written so that syntax colors are not really necessary. I   
   certainly changed my habit and value that feature (and especially   
   in the implemented form using external syntax specification files   
   instead of builtin syntaxes, which contributes to non-bloat, IMO).   
      
   I also don't use Vim plugins.   
      
   >   
   > * Vi already had lots of options; Vim seemed to go off the deep end.   
   > Too many knobs means you're forever tweaking more than getting the job   
   > done.   
      
   Okay, but you don't have to use them. I certainly use only a dozen   
   of all the options I can set. But whenever I missed a feature I   
   look into the docs and find a new one that's there to support me.   
   The huge list of options can certainly be frightening, I'm sure.   
      
   >   
   > * Pretty sure Nvi is smaller (depending on build options) than a full   
   > Vim install.  Yes I still care about size, despite lots of memory and   
   > disk with modern machines.   
      
   Yes, fair enough. That's certainly yet more an argument if you're   
   comparing Vi with Emacs whose executable was ever in the 8-10 MB   
   range where Vi, Vi-clones, and Vi-improvements were much smaller.   
      
   Thanks for the insights and your preferences explained.   
      
   Janis   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)