3 ms·
I’m now a Vim user in the terminal, but while growing up on mid-90s Slackware I used `joe`. I really figured that little editor out, and it was surprisingly fea
by GavinAnderegg 6y ago
I’m now a Vim user in the terminal, but while growing up on mid-90s Slackware I used `joe`. I really figured that little editor out, and it was surprisingly feature rich. Still shares a fond place in my heart.
In the late 90s/early 2000s I started encountering Unix machines that weren’t my family’s 486. I found that `joe` really wasn’t installed anywhere, so I endeavoured to figure out `vi`. This worked well as it was often the default editor on the systems I was attaching to. Some systems used `pico`, and later `nano`... and I found that annoying.
Fast forward a few years, and `nano` seemed to be the default everywhere. At first I found this very irritating, but over time I’ve come to realize that many have the same sort of feelings about `nano` that I did about `joe`. No, they’re not super-extensible mega-editors, but they’re fine for editing a few config files or a crontab. More than fine once I bothered to wrap my head around the feature set and stopped grumbling every time I was in a `nano` session. (Though I still set `vim` as my default when reasonable on servers.)
So, I’m sorry little `nano` for all the past grumbling. You may not be my first choice, but I respect you for the workhorse you are!
- discreteevent 6y agoI'm the opposite. I used to use vim and then for years I was working on windows stuff. When I came back to linux I wasn't that fluent with vim anymore and I didn't use it for development anyway, just live changes for config files etc. So I decided to switch to nano for that. It's great and it feels really small and light compared to vim (by "feels" I mean subjectively) and I like that.