4 ms·
> Emacs/vi(m) are not necessarily the be-all, end-all of editors for all time to come; maybe one of those alternative editors will one day prove to be superior
by alextgordon 16y ago
> Emacs/vi(m) are not necessarily the be-all, end-all of editors for all time to come; maybe one of those alternative editors will one day prove to be superior
Some of those editors are already superior. Imagine you convince <insert name of computer-illiterate relative> to switch to linux. If they need to edit a text file, are you going to recommend Kate/gedit or Vim/Emacs?
I would wager a lot more non-programmers use text editors than programmers. Of course programmers use text editors a lot more often, but still the importance of those other editors should not be underestimated.
- verysimple 16y ago> Some of those editors are already superior. To vi(m)/emacs? An example?
- alextgordon 16y agoThey're easier to use.
- aerique 16y agoNo, they're easier to get into if you're used to Notepad.
- alextgordon 16y agoI find this response baffling. Are you seriously claiming that normal people (non-developers) would do better using Vim/Emacs rather than a Notepad-like editor? Or that most normal people aren't used to Notepad-like editors? I despair...
- gnosis 16y agoNot even that. For instance, gvim comes with an "easy mode" (just start it as "evim"). In this mode, it acts very much like Notepad (you're automatically in insert mode, and you can just use the File menu to open files, save, and exit). I'm not sure how much having this mode buys vim, however, as there's no gradual way to progress from "easy mode" to more advanced vim use. Except for the syntax hilighting it offers, its users might as well just be using Notepad, nano, pico, or what have you.