rbbb@RICE.EDU (David Chase) (10/21/86)
Before you all jump in and say "gosh emacs is a pig, we certainly could not support the users that we do now if they all ran emacs instead of vi/ed/teco/sos/edt/jove/ked", stop to think what things people do in the different editors. Emacs does a hell of a lot; some people here dive into emacs and don't leave until they log out or until the memory allocator craps on them for lack of any more address soace. It takes longer to fire up. On the other hand, it allows you to edit more than one file at once, program up complicated transformations, read mail, read bulletin boards, run compilations in a subshell, etc, etc. Of course it uses more resources. With any luck it will free up some valuable human resources, but I make no claims here. I cannot speak for vi, because I know nothing about it. I suspect that it doesn't do as much. Ed certainly does not. So, comparing the resources used by the different editors is something like comparing the resources used by motor homes and volkswagen bugs. Please don't lose sight of this before embarking on another net-clogging editor dicussion. David
mjy@galbp.UUCP (Michael Yoffee) (10/23/86)
> I cannot speak for vi, because I know nothing about it. I suspect that it > doesn't do as much. Ed certainly does not. > > So, comparing the resources used by the different editors is something > like comparing the resources used by motor homes and volkswagen bugs. .....give me a break....so what kind of vehicle would you prefer to drive to work in every day.....a Mac-Truck or a Ferrari?! -- Michael Yoffee Harris / Lanier Computer R&D {akgua,akgub,gatech}!galbp!mjy "These concepts fill a much needed gap..." - [Ken Thompson]
carroll@snail.CS.UIUC.EDU (10/27/86)
Besides, those resource are already available and (in effect) being paid for since the shell is running too. It would be like taking a mobile home over to someone's house for dinner; why use all that gas when they probably have a stove already anyway?