I disagree. The two apps have wildly different configuration schemes, yes, to wildly different ends, but in this case we're addressing the exact same function i

I disagree. The two apps have wildly different configuration schemes, yes, to wildly different ends, but in this case we're addressing the exact same function in both editors. It's not a question of whether vim's syntax highlighting is better or worse than emacs's ability to run tetris. It's a direct look at which of the two apps makes it easier and more effective to configure the modeline. Now, you might argue that that's not going to be a determining factor for anyone who's choosing between the two—because perhaps they are apples and oranges, but in this case he's simply saying that vim has more vitamin b. So to speak. In general though I find the apples-and-oranges complaint about vim-emacs comparisons to be disingenuous. You may say, 'Oh, but emacs is much more than a text editor, so it's foolish to compare them directly!' but not everybody who's interested in choosing one or the other would necessarily have any interest in the OS-like capabilities of emacs. That is to say: there is still a very good reason to review emacs purely in its function as a text editor, even if that is not the full extent of its capabilities. Many, if not most, people in the market for a text editor aren't really interested in whether, after several years' learning the ropes, they might run a full Turing Machine in it.