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=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,HTML_MESSAGE, 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 2aac6347 for ; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 15:56:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 693A89BCD1; Fri, 10 Jan 2020 01:56:07 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 591769BCB6; Fri, 10 Jan 2020 01:55:25 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ccc.com header.i=@ccc.com header.b="sV0l3e8/"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 583899BCBE; Fri, 10 Jan 2020 01:55:14 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-qk1-f176.google.com (mail-qk1-f176.google.com [209.85.222.176]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC66F9BCA9 for ; Fri, 10 Jan 2020 01:55:11 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-qk1-f176.google.com with SMTP id t129so6380378qke.10 for ; Thu, 09 Jan 2020 07:55:11 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ccc.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=AiPZ6tUFyWZusByGJOSN7g2mueDSPpZEU5rPtiBvVik=; b=sV0l3e8/eNP1aXSLXpDM2fU8oEpUDMzv/KS4fOdNeXlVwcfVjK/BJ3ffVAsSbRHnmr e5IccGJ+SndFhcw8LdbBFcl5pewzTc7uEZR2zu9tAimZuunKfVjG8rXK8ZTg0sJ8Htnc 6lLWkemBovHZPagl+7nnd+H/p8Xcu4cN9mmEs= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=AiPZ6tUFyWZusByGJOSN7g2mueDSPpZEU5rPtiBvVik=; b=o3QoAZMn9huaD+W7mcZv/axGx4NIo+rSJJ9Uteb5W9cQEUCjdy3yI/y0tZezb6s0Pg Tuk3PMpuqjxDdBMvhlI2KPWS0JPJ67HDJ6Q1w2UCt+AQPJ7VLniE8+b9Nzg+Ogr1QrwI fhzhb+gH9GLgSA5mt7v3A3ZKcJ5Z5bYfw/hsRe0ws65+51SjT2FVWYQDsJaPMHryPuWV Ze+gDwckE1nfhl3HZbH42hke9CbfYLdSCygpzoVH4HzYiqErwLN1beIPaf9Z9+5guRV1 vYPxVpPrB0wRdcx9LiAzin3RLlnb2vbPSP8ebBdcMmLKW3TmF8O4ccV3RRp7F7Vvr8ij u7UQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWgmzD11l2/HH5QgmJ8WwP1/0WTUO9xBbiH5Enrhi31qIvZejXR Q0jYO2d8DSJBV46TqkmBhG6CxJkmU3JxbQvctjMEZWcFfyQ9uQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwdl30I+jxhHkdFfWHI5WPr+A0740TqHnY5F9YlPnRjd5NZO1Fw0yC36nstTP9JGY93lrWZEL45z+DIPySwylk= X-Received: by 2002:a37:6346:: with SMTP id x67mr10135192qkb.476.1578585310487; Thu, 09 Jan 2020 07:55:10 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200109012830.GC16808@mcvoy.com> <20200109020720.GG16808@mcvoy.com> <202001090423.0094NooZ379407@darkstar.fourwinds.com> In-Reply-To: <202001090423.0094NooZ379407@darkstar.fourwinds.com> From: Clem Cole Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2020 10:54:44 -0500 Message-ID: To: Jon Steinhart Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000adf6c2059bb7085e" 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: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society , Computer Old Farts Followers Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --000000000000adf6c2059bb7085e Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Answering, but CCing COFF if folks want to continue. This is less about UNIX and more about how we all got to where we are. On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 11:24 PM Jon Steinhart wrote: > Clem, this seems like an unusual position for you to take. vim is > backwards > compatible with vi (and also ed), so it added to an existing ecosystem. > No, really unusually when you think about it. vim is backward compatible except when it's not (as Bakul points out) - which is my complaint. It's *almost* compatible and those small differences are really annoying when you expect one thing and get something else (*i.e.* the least astonishment principle). The key point here is for *some people*, those few differences are not an issue and are not astonished by them. But for *some of the rest of us* (probably people like me that have used the program since PDP-11 days) that only really care about the original parts, the new stuff is of little value and so the small differences are astonishing. Which comes back to the question of good and best. It all depends on one what you value/where you put the high order bit. I'm not willing to "pay" for the it; as it gives me little value. Doug started this thread with his observation that ex/vi was huge compared to other editors. * i.e.* value: small simple easy to understand (Rob's old "*cat -v considered harmful*" argument if you will). The BSD argument had always been: "the new stuff is handy." The emacs crew tends to take a similar stand. I probably don't go quite as far as Rob, but I certainly lean in that direction. I generally would rather something small and new that solves a different (set of) problem(s), then adding yet another wart on to an older program, *particularly when you change the base functionality *- which is my vi *vs. *vim complaint*.* [i.e. 'partial credit' does not cut it]. To me, another good example is 'more', 'less' and 'pg'. Eric Schienbrood wrote the original more(ucb) to try to duplicate the ITS functionality (he wrote it for the PDP-11/70 in Cory Hall BTW - Ernie did not exist and 4.1BSD was a few years in the future - so small an simple of a huge value). It went out in the BSD tapes, people loved it and were happy. It solved a problem as we had it. Life was good. Frankly, other than NIH, I'm not sure why the folks at AT&T decided to create pg a few years later since more was already in the wild, but at least it was a different program (Mary Ann's story of vi *vs*. se if probably in the same vein). But because of that behavior, if someone like me came to an AT&T based system with only pg installed, so those of us that liked/were used to more(ucb) could install it and life was good. Note pg was/is different in functionality, it's similar, but not finger compatible. But other folks seem to have thought neither was 'good enough' -- thus later less(gnu) was created adding a ton of new functionality to Eric's program. The facts are clear, some (ney many) people >>love<< that new functionality, like going backward. I >>personally<< rarely care/need for it, Eric's program was (is) good enough for me. Like Doug's observation of ed *vs.* ex/vi; less is huge compared to the original more (or pg for that matter). But if you value the new features, I suspect you might think that's not an issue. Thanks to Moore's law, the size in this case probably does not matter too much (other than introducing new bugs). At least, when folks wrote did Gnu's less, the basic more(ucb) behavior was left along and if you set PAGER=more less(gnu) pretty much works as I expect it too. So I now don't bring Eric's program with me, the same way Bakul describes installing nvi on new systems (an activiity I also do). Back to vi *vs.* nvi *vs.* vim *et. al.* Frankly, in my own case, I do >>occaisonally<< use split screens, but frankly, I can get most of the same from having a window manager, different iterm2 windows and cut/paste. So even that extension to nvi, is of limited value to me. vim just keeps adding more and more cruft and its even bigger. I personally don't care for the new functionality, and the size of it all is worrisome. What am I buying? That said, if the new features do not hurt me, then I don't really care. I might even use some of the new functionality - hey I run mac OS not v7 or BSD 4.x for my day to day work and I do use the mac window manager, the browser *et al*, but as I type this message I have 6 other iterm2 windows open with work I am doing in other areas. Let me take a look at this issue in a different way. I have long been a 'car guy' and like many of those times in my youth spent time and money playing/racing etc. I've always thought electric was a great idea/but there has been nothing for me. Note: As many of you know my work in computers has been in HPC, and I've been lucky to spend a lot of time with my customers, in the auto and aerospace industry (*i.e.* the current Audi A6 was designed on one of my supercomputer systems). The key point is have tended to follow technology in their area and tend to "in-tune" with a lot of developments. The result, except for my wife's minivan (that she preferred in the years when our kids were small), I've always been a die-hard German-engineered/performance car person. But when Elon announced the Model 3 (like 1/2 the techie world), I put down a deposit and waited. Well why I was waiting, my techie daughter (who also loves cars), got a chance to drive one. She predicted I would hate it!!! So when my ticket finally came up, I went to drive them. She was right!!! With the Model 3, you get a cool car, but it's about the size of a Corrolla. Coming from Germans cars for the last 35 years, the concept of spending $60K US in practice for a Corrolla just did not do it for me. I ended up ordering the current Unixmobile, my beloved Tesla Model S/P100D. The truth is, I paid a lot of money for it but I *value *what I got for my money. A number of people don't think it's worth it. I get that, but I'm still happy with what I have. Will there someday be a $20K electric car like my Model S? While I think electric cars will get there (I point out the same price curve on technology such microwave ovens from the 1970so today), but I actually doubt that there will be a $20K electric vehicle like my Model S. The reason is that to sell this car because it as to be expensive for technology-based reasons, so Tesla had to add a lot of 'luxury' features like other cars in the class, other sports cars, Mercedes, *et al*. As they removed them (*i.e.* the Model 3) you still get a cool car, but it's not at all the same as the Model S. So the point is, if I wanted an electric car, I had to choose between a performance/luxury *vs*. size/functionality. I realized I valued the former (and still do), but I understand not everyone does or will. Coming back to our topic, I really don't think this is a 'get my lawn' issue as much, as asking someone what they really value/what they really need. If you place a high-value you something, you will argue that its best; if it has little value you will not. --000000000000adf6c2059bb7085e Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Answering, but= =C2=A0 CCing COFF if folks want to continue.=C2=A0 This is less about UNIX = and more about how we all got to where we are.

On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 11:24 PM Jon= Steinhart <jon@fourwinds.com> wrote:
Clem, this seems like= an unusual position for you to take.=C2=A0 vim is backwards
compatible with vi (and also ed), so it added to an existing ecosystem.
No, really unusually w= hen you think about it.=C2=A0 vim is backward compatible except when it'= ;s=C2=A0not (as Bakul points out) - which is my complaint.=C2=A0 It's <= i>almost compatible and those small differences are really annoying whe= n you expect one thing and get something else (i.e. the least astoni= shment principle).=C2=A0

The key point he= re is for some people, those few differences are not an issue and ar= e not astonished by them.=C2=A0 But for some of the rest of us (prob= ably people like me that have used the program since PDP-11 days) that only= really care about the original parts, the new stuff is of little value and= so the small differences are astonishing.=C2=A0 <= span style=3D"color:rgb(0,0,255);font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">Wh= ich comes back to the question of good and best.=C2=A0 =C2=A0It all depends= on one what you value/where you put the high order bit.=C2=A0 I'= m not willing to "pay" for the it; as it gives me little value.

Doug started this thread with his observation that ex/vi= was huge compared to other editors.=C2=A0 i.e. value: small simple = easy to understand (Rob's old "cat -v considered harmful&qu= ot; argument if you will).=C2=A0 The BSD argument had always been: "th= e new stuff is handy." The emacs crew tends to take a similar stand.= =C2=A0 I probably don't go quite as far as Rob, but I certainly lean in= that direction.=C2=A0 I generally would rather something small and new tha= t solves a different (set of) problem(s), then adding yet another wart on t= o an older program, particularly when you change the base functionality = - which is my vi vs. vim complaint. [i.e. 'partial cr= edit' does not cut it].

To me, another good example is 'mo= re', 'less' and 'pg'.=C2=A0 Eric Schienbrood wrote the = original more(ucb) to try to duplicate the ITS functionality (he wrote it f= or the PDP-11/70 in Cory Hall BTW - Ernie did not exist and 4.1BSD was a fe= w years in the future - so small an simple of a huge value).=C2=A0 It went = out in the BSD tapes, people loved it and were happy.=C2=A0 It solved a pro= blem as we had it.=C2=A0 Life was good.=C2=A0 Frankly, other than NIH, I= 9;m not sure why the folks at AT&T decided to create pg a few years lat= er since more was already in the wild, but at least it was a different prog= ram (Mary Ann's story of vi vs. se if probably in the same vein)= .=C2=A0 =C2=A0But because of that behavior, if someone like me came to an A= T&T based system with only pg installed, so those of=C2=A0us that liked= /were used to more(ucb) could install it and life was good.=C2=A0 =C2=A0Not= e pg was/is different in functionality, it's similar, but not finger co= mpatible.

But other folks seem to have thought neither w= as 'good enough' -- thus later less(gnu) was created adding a ton o= f new functionality to Eric's program.=C2=A0 The facts are clear, some = (ney many) people >>love<< that new functionality, like going b= ackward.=C2=A0 I >>personally<< rarely care/need for it, Eric&#= 39;s program was (is) good enough for me.=C2=A0 =C2=A0Like Doug's obser= vation of ed vs. ex/vi; less is huge compared to the original more (or= pg for that matter).=C2=A0 =C2=A0But if you value the new features, I susp= ect you might think that's not an issue.=C2=A0 Thanks to Moore's la= w, the size in this case probably does not matter too much (other than intr= oducing new bugs).=C2=A0 =C2=A0 At least, when folks wrote did Gnu's le= ss, the basic more(ucb) behavior was left along and if you set PAGER=3Dmore=C2=A0les= s(gnu) pretty much works as I expect it too.=C2=A0 So I now don't bring= Eric's program with me, the same way Bakul describes installing nvi on= new systems (an activiity I also do).=C2=A0=C2=A0

Back to vi = vs. nvi vs. vim et. al. Frankly, in my own case, I do = >>occaisonally<< use split screens, but frankly, I can get most= of the same from having a window manager, different iterm2 windows and cut= /paste.=C2=A0 =C2=A0So even that extension to nvi, is of limited value to m= e.=C2=A0 vim just keeps adding more and more cruft and its even bigger.=C2= =A0 =C2=A0I personally don't care for the new functionality, and the si= ze of it all is worrisome.=C2=A0 What am I buying?=C2=A0 That said, if the = new features do not hurt me, then I don't really care.=C2=A0 I might ev= en use some of the new functionality - hey I run mac OS not v7 or BSD 4.x f= or my day to day work and I do use the mac window manager, the browser e= t al, but as I type this message I have 6 other iterm2 windows open wit= h work I am doing in other areas.
Let me take a look at this issue = in a different way.=C2=A0 =C2=A0I have long been a 'car guy= ' and like many of those times in my youth spent time and money playing= /racing etc. I've always thought electric was a great idea/but there ha= s been nothing for me. Note: As many of you know my work in computers has b= een in HPC, and I've been lucky to spend a lot of time with my customer= s, in the auto and aerospace industry (i.e. the current Audi A6 was = designed on one of my supercomputer systems).=C2=A0 The key point is have t= ended to follow technology in their area and tend to "in-tune" wi= th a lot of developments.=C2=A0 The result, except for my wife's miniva= n (that she preferred in the years when our kids were small), I've alwa= ys been a die-hard=C2=A0German-engineered/performance car person.=C2=A0 But= when Elon announced the=C2=A0Model 3 (like 1/2 the techie world), I put do= wn a deposit and waited.

=
Well why I was waiting, my techie daughter (who also loves cars), go= t a chance to drive one.=C2=A0 =C2=A0She predicted I would hate it!!!=C2=A0= So when my ticket finally came up, I went to drive them.= =C2=A0 She was right!!!=C2=A0 With the=C2=A0Model 3, you = get a cool car, but it's about the size of a Corrolla.=C2=A0 Coming fro= m Germans cars for the last 35 years, the concept of spending $60K US in pr= actice for a Corrolla=C2=A0just did not do it for me.=C2=A0 =C2=A0I ended u= p ordering the current Unixmobile,=C2=A0my beloved=C2=A0= Te= sla Model S/P100D.=C2=A0
=C2=A0=C2=A0
The truth is, I paid a lot of money for it but = I value what I got for my money. A=C2=A0number of people don't t= hink it's worth it.=C2=A0 I get that, but I'm still happy with what= I have.=C2=A0 =C2=A0Will there someday be a $20K electric car like my Mode= l S?=C2=A0 While I think electric cars will get there (I point out the same= price curve on technology such microwave ovens from the 1970so today), but= I actually doubt that there will be a $20K electric vehicle like my Model = S.

The reason is that to sell this car because it as to be expens= ive for technology-based reasons, so Tesla had to add a lot of 'luxury&= #39; features like other cars in the class, other sports cars, Mercedes,=C2= =A0=C2=A0et al.=C2=A0 As they removed them (i.e. the Model 3)= you still get a cool car, but it's not at all the same as the Model S.= =C2=A0 =C2=A0So the point is, if I wanted an electric car, I had to choose = between a performance/luxury vs. size/functionality.=C2=A0 I realize= d I valued the former (and still do), but I understand not everyone does or= will.

Coming back to our topic,=C2=A0I really don't think this is a 'get my lawn' iss= ue as much, as asking someone what they really value/what they really need.= =C2=A0 =C2=A0If you place a high-value you something, you will argue that i= ts best; if it has little value you will not.=C2=A0 =C2=A0

=
--000000000000adf6c2059bb7085e--