From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.8 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FROM,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_SBL_CSS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 5786 invoked from network); 31 Jan 2021 03:16:32 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (45.79.103.53) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 31 Jan 2021 03:16:32 -0000 Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id E70589C7F0; Sun, 31 Jan 2021 13:16:28 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC9499C653; Sun, 31 Jan 2021 13:16:13 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="VgrWTi1M"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 29F359C653; Sun, 31 Jan 2021 13:16:12 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-oo1-f41.google.com (mail-oo1-f41.google.com [209.85.161.41]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F2A8A9C63D for ; Sun, 31 Jan 2021 13:16:09 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-oo1-f41.google.com with SMTP id y21so60563oot.12 for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2021 19:16:09 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:date:subject:message-id :to; bh=lb+zztaenzZwMjGJaW0aY1/LZrqCyq1awiv29w0envY=; b=VgrWTi1MFc1XLY9CcfqhttuO/CuAgKsWOncRzZ9yhJOWbLrZZO8MaM/zVn+kNkijxR PYXLLVfQ+NKqQ2dW9iT2KE2R7WlvPkYCAa05ikhUBNy4RMAe6fr7m60VKxUWuP9GBsIW KIV/YAsqAz8whu/uEijTG4qGv7eWgKAF93w2vlrEisA98RaYhUfaJu+3xCJo4L8TRI1r fy24AgHyphkw3aDnLjYFkExJ1LNgGLZcNfyrLVq73ECbcyuJJEpRBBPzFDhfNrHpyIJp 1gNEetg8bDS5AMlf+MoMj/yTxWSVZQdv9xWvBEAtI+mYaUFZV96P5v1EZFs2rqlsZJfP w7hw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:date :subject:message-id:to; bh=lb+zztaenzZwMjGJaW0aY1/LZrqCyq1awiv29w0envY=; b=PdNES3oGsMgIARj2bUrC5OkC9IvAK1BapbFn8vVY4dlBz7oJOfcjTwlsndA01UDYOB CXWmv983RVc6iz2RJ5x2X6OjYMedrG5Sk6QKY485QiV7gXsQzLMZTNlRYYre+tGYs90h +PNrEQhvMoqgvffl3X/OydoTDe5tIydLhlVMTs1P/nzTMjLPk+2t7ZjRWMOgImyt30g0 moA51O0vuYy/A56r3ltqm4e2e7nMAM8k0rF8vWrxhbXHT+oA3QhHhV39XiGx918Cx41s aqFCVH4N6ucX4rByViv9lpAzyEgWJFnnZmHKjUwFAK3YyspsmlwFPLpcC1tUuDafvAf9 8DZQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531a7lNt+qVoi53x0jJAHxkVh/YuHplYnlwOsbhBq0MlfMivyzJq 8CmLxurV6swigOXubM6EITTr3vZxsvo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwT2Md5ZwyNtYaZAgBMh9XvHQHkIgILwNEfZ68lhkRQ1yZhhkAyM2RKgAjlIV3P446wSumx+w== X-Received: by 2002:a4a:9873:: with SMTP id z48mr7914577ooi.44.1612062969044; Sat, 30 Jan 2021 19:16:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.51.113.134] ([107.126.48.237]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y19sm3145264otq.1.2021.01.30.19.16.08 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 30 Jan 2021 19:16:08 -0800 (PST) From: Will Senn Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2021 21:16:07 -0600 Message-Id: To: tuhs@tuhs.org X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (16H22) Subject: [TUHS] Qed vs ed 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: , Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" Hi all, So. On a lighter note. I was tooling around the web and came across a discus= sion of QED, the editor. It=E2=80=99s been resurrected in no small part base= d on discussions on this list (and members like Rob Pike). Anyhow, there=E2=80= =99s a version that compiles in modern systems and that handles wide charact= ers. My question for the group is this how different is QED from ed? I=E2=80= =99ve read Dennis=E2=80=99 paper on the history of QED and it=E2=80=99s fasc= inating, but all I really got out of the discussion related to ed, was that Q= ED was a precursor. I=E2=80=99m curious about functional parity or lack ther= eof, more than technical differences. In full disclosure, and at the risk of= drawing fire from lovers of other editors, I have to confess a love of the o= riginal ed (and it=E2=80=99s decendent ed=E2=80=99s and vi). Cheers, Will Sent from my iPhone=