> The thesis of this post is roughly that nano, when configured, is enough of an editor for the author. Which is totally fine! People should be happy with their

> The thesis of this post is roughly that nano, when configured, is enough of an editor for the author. Which is totally fine! People should be happy with their tools and not feel pressured by popularity to use what others use (vim, emacs being prime competitors in this case). My advice to the author would be to give emacs an other shot. It can be configured to behave a lot like nano (and isn't modal), and runs in the terminal. But there's an ecosystem of plugins around it and has a lot of stuff that's built-in. But one day one of the journey it'll behave almost exactly as nano.