3 ms·
If one has bash as the default shell, why not ex as the standard line-oriented text editor? Postscript - ex is the version of ed rolled up in vim, which extend
by chalst 15y ago
If one has bash as the default shell, why not ex as the standard line-oriented text editor?
Postscript - ex is the version of ed rolled up in vim, which extends the command set of ed. vi, by contrast, handles colon commands by invoking ed externally.
- RexRollman 15y agoIIRC, I became interested in ed after reading about the Plan 9 editor Sam, which was described as "ed on steroids, lots of steroids"[1]. Sadly, I never got around to trying Sam. [1]http://sam.cat-v.org/ http://sam.cat-v.org/
- ez77 15y ago"ex is the version of ed rolled up in vim, which extends the command set of ed. vi, by contrast, handles colon commands by invoking ed externally." Actually vi and ex came about at the same time. You can see the POSIX standard mentions [1] ex and vi (not vim) together, and you can also refer to [2], under the "First appeared" column. [1] http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/ex.html http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/ex... [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Unix_utilities http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Unix_utilities
- chalst 15y agoIndeed, there is a mistake in what I wrote. What I should have said is that Bill Joy wrote ex, and then he used this implementation to write vi. Vim is like vi in that it comes with an ex built in, which is an extension of Bill Joy's ex.