From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [45.79.103.53]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id d4243147 for ; Tue, 7 Jan 2020 20:17:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 1215A9BCD4; Wed, 8 Jan 2020 06:17:46 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A4B09BCA8; Wed, 8 Jan 2020 06:17:31 +1000 (AEST) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id AF57D9BCA8; Wed, 8 Jan 2020 06:17:29 +1000 (AEST) Received: from server907.appriver.com (server907e.appriver.com [204.232.250.40]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D048945FC for ; Wed, 8 Jan 2020 06:17:29 +1000 (AEST) X-Note: This Email was scanned by AppRiver SecureTide X-Note-AR-ScanTimeLocal: 01/07/2020 3:17:29 PM X-Note: SecureTide Build: 11/20/2019 4:33:52 PM UTC (2.8.10.0) X-Note: Filtered by 10.246.0.224 X-Note-AR-Scan: None - PIPE Received: by server907.appriver.com (CommuniGate Pro PIPE 6.2.4) with PIPE id 48500538; Tue, 07 Jan 2020 15:17:29 -0500 Received: from [10.246.0.39] (HELO smtp.us.exg7.exghost.com) by server907.appriver.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.2.4) with ESMTPS id 48500495; Tue, 07 Jan 2020 15:17:26 -0500 Received: from E16DN31A-S1E7.exg7.exghost.local (192.168.244.15) by E16DN31C-S1E7.exg7.exghost.local (192.168.246.20) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1913.0; Tue, 7 Jan 2020 15:17:22 -0500 Received: from E16DN31A-S1E7.exg7.exghost.local ([192.168.244.15]) by E16DN31A-S1E7.exg7.exghost.local ([192.168.244.15]) with mapi id 15.01.1913.000; Tue, 7 Jan 2020 15:17:22 -0500 From: Brantley Coile To: Doug McIlroy Thread-Topic: [TUHS] screen editors Thread-Index: AQHVxZS3r1bg3gpqVUKhMRN1in3E7aff95gA Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2020 20:17:22 +0000 Message-ID: <02159ABA-0114-4A30-A30B-F3A5104309DE@coraid.com> References: <202001071957.007JveQu169574@coolidge.cs.dartmouth.edu> In-Reply-To: <202001071957.007JveQu169574@coolidge.cs.dartmouth.edu> Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [208.71.233.237] x-rerouted-by-exchange: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <01067D416688CC46B290EB82E349A9A9@fwd7.exghost.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Note: This Email was scanned by AppRiver SecureTide X-Note-AR-ScanTimeLocal: 01/07/2020 3:17:26 PM X-Note: SecureTide Build: 11/20/2019 4:33:52 PM UTC (2.8.10.0) X-Note: Filtered by 10.246.0.224 X-Policy: GLOBAL X-Primary: GLOBAL@coraid.com X-Note-Sender: X-Virus-Scan: V- X-Note-SnifferID: 0 X-GBUdb-Analysis: 1, 192.168.244.15, Ugly c=0.721104 p=-0.974406 Source White X-Signature-Violations: 0-0-0-4070-c X-Note-419: 9.0909 ms. Fail:0 Chk:1354 of 1354 total X-Note: VSCH-CT/SI: 0-1354/SG:1 1/7/2020 3:16:36 PM X-Note: Spam Tests Failed: X-Country-Path: PRIVATE->PRIVATE-> X-Note-Sending-IP: 10.246.0.39 X-Note-Reverse-DNS: X-Note-Return-Path: brantley@coraid.com X-Note: User Rule Hits: X-Note: Global Rule Hits: G637 G638 G639 G640 G658 G659 G660 G814 X-Note: Encrypt Rule Hits: X-Note: Mail Class: VALID Subject: Re: [TUHS] screen editors X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "tuhs@tuhs.org" Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" No point here, other than showing the size of sam in its native Plan 9 habi= tat. ehg% size /bin/sam /bin/aux/samterm 95,514t + 8,764d + 75,868b =3D 180,146 /bin/sam 145,093t + 28,708d + 59,508b =3D 233,309 /bin/aux/samterm The size gives me a better idea of the code complexity. For completeness, h= ere's the size of vi on my Mac. bwc-downtown:~ bwc$ size /usr/bin/vi __TEXT __DATA __OBJC others dec hex 1,585,152 163,840 0 4,295,012,352 4,296,761,344 1001b6000 =09 Good thing the Mac has shared libraries? (Commas added for clarity) Again, no point, other than a data point. Brantley > On Jan 7, 2020, at 2:57 PM, Doug McIlroy wrote: >=20 > McIlroy: >> [vi] was so excesssive right from the start that I refused to use it. >> Sam was the first screen editor that I deemed worthwhile, and I >> still use it today. >=20 > Paulsen: >> my sam build is more than 2 times bigger than Gunnar Ritter's vi >> (or Steve Kirkendall's elvis) and even bigger than Bram Moolenaar's vim. >=20 > % wc -c /bin/vi bin/sam bin/samterm > 1706152 /bin/vi > 112208 bin/sam > 153624 bin/samterm > These mumbers are from Red Hat Linux. > The 6:1 discrepancy is understated because > vi is stripped and the sam files are not. > All are 64-bit, dynamically linked.