From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <13426df10808190901y3ec5f788sb6141a5edfc98c51@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:01:46 -0700 From: "ron minnich" To: wendellxe@yahoo.com, "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@9fans.net> In-Reply-To: <382936.47212.qm@web57610.mail.re1.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <382936.47212.qm@web57610.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [9fans] Using the Acme Editor Topicbox-Message-UUID: fef570f0-ead3-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 8:52 AM, Wendell xe wrote: > Seeking an alternative to vi and emacs, I've been giving Acme a try (acme-sac, actually). After reading the articles and man pages and playing with it for a few days, I'll admit I don't see how Acme could be even remotely competitive with vim/emacs for editing code. > You have to learn it. If you want emacs and vi, you won't get them with acme -- besides, you already had them, remember? Acme is a very nice tool. But you have to climb the learning curve, and there's no escaping it. I don't know how else to put it. Most times, I use acme, but still use emacs and vi as well. They are different. FWIW, there's lots of people who think emacs and vi are a joke for code use, and use the more sophisticated IDEs out there. To each his own. ron