From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu From: David Rubin Message-ID: <3B548F62.8423A453@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <20010710102311.AA4B61998A@mail.cse.psu.edu>, <20010710124326.F22003@cackle.proxima.alt.za> Subject: Re: [9fans] sam vs acme Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 08:43:07 +0000 Topicbox-Message-UUID: d067299a-eac9-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 Lucio De Re wrote: > [...] yet I have > little doubt that wily knocks the spots off sam on Unix as regards > usefulness. This is not true at all, IMO. I've used both sam and wily, and I've found that wily is too slow, especially when searching for text in large documents. Also, having used Acme, wily is a lot less similar to Acme than Unix sam is like Plan9 sam. WRT "usefulness," that depends entirely on how you *use* the editor...sam boots faster and finds text faster. Everything else seems to be approximately equal. david -- If 91 were prime, it would be a counterexample to your conjecture. -- Bruce Wheeler