Re: [9fans] text editor

[anothy@cosym.net]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 714 bytes --]

i've used Wily for quite a bit (although not for a good while now)
and found the differences and inconsistancies to be really painful.
i imagine it'd still be a good step up for someone not already
familiar with acme. the acme-in-inferno-on-unix solution is one
i use occasionally now (since i'm only occasionally at a unix box)
and really like.

since my unix boxes are generally remote, i edit files on them most
of the time by 9fs'ing (using u9fs on the unix box) and running
acme. occasionally i have to edit files on a box i don't admin (and
thus can't put u9fs on), and sam -r works well for that. even that's
somewhat awkward (to be polite) now... i _really_ miss acme's
mouse chording.
ア


[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 1422 bytes --]

From: "Russ Cox" <rsc@plan9.bell-labs.com>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] text editor
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 10:10:00 -0400
Message-ID: <7982c19b270270becaf0164e247d55f8@plan9.bell-labs.com>

> To each his own.  As I've said, I'm comfortable with vi on Unix boxen
> and with sam on Plan 9.  Your mileage may vary.  There are situations

i advise you, and anyone else in your situation, not to try acme.
once you get used to it you'll curse vi and never be able to get
anything done on unix.