[comp.os.msdos.misc] vi on ms-dos

mckie@sky.arc.nasa.gov (Bill McKie) (04/30/91)

Looking for a vi-like editor for ms-dos (Will be
running on a notebook 386).  Commercial or free.
Thanks.

mckie@sky.arc.nasa.gov

tarjeij@ulrik.uio.no (Tarjei Jensen) (05/30/91)

In article <4793@cocoa46.UUCP> reichert@motcid.UUCP (Chuck KD9JQ) writes:
> Question....what on earth for?   There's so many other more desirable
> low cost editors for ms-dos out there already.  PC-Write, XTREE-PRO, etc. are
> among a few.  Or are there some hidden features of vi I haven't been able to
> find yet.  I find vi a pain to use every time I have to move to another line,
> delete, copy, etc.  It can be done but the other programs I use make it so
> much easier.
>
>   Chuck Reichert   KD9JQ
>

If you move around on many different systems it is very useful to have a common
editor. VI is an editor that is available on many platforms (Unix, MSDOS, VMS).
Besides it got regular expressions, which means powerful search and replace
operations. This is something few if any of the MSDOS editors can do. Besides
VI supports most of what I want an editor to do. The few things that I would
want in addition is not something I would want to give up VI for (or the
functionality of VI).

In other words; VI is old, but is still a useful tool. VI enables me to be up
to speed while others are trying to remember which key sequence does what in
emacs. After all didn't Berkeley bring out ined after VI? Why did VI become
standard while ined seems to have died?


Greetings from Norway,

--
// Tarjei T. Jensen - if it ain't broken, fix it anyway!
//    tarjeij@ulrik.uio.no       || +47 87 21138
// Working, but not speaking for the Norwegian National Library.

feustel@netcom.COM (David Feustel) (05/31/91)

I run on 4 or 5 different operating systems. VI is on all of them
(including VMS as of today). I use VI on all of them so I only have to
remember one editor.
-- 
David Feustel, 1930 Curdes Ave, Fort Wayne, IN 46805, (219) 482-9631
EMAIL: feustel@netcom.com  or feustel@cvax.ipfw.indiana.edu

glenn@welch.jhu.edu (Glenn M. Mason) (05/31/91)

In article <TARJEIJ.91May30095739@ulrik.uio.no> tarjeij@ulrik.uio.no (Tarjei Jensen) writes:
>In article <4793@cocoa46.UUCP> reichert@motcid.UUCP (Chuck KD9JQ) writes:
>> Question....what on earth for?   There's so many other more desirable
[ stuff deleted ]
>If you move around on many different systems it is very useful to have a common
>editor. VI is an editor that is available on many platforms (Unix, MSDOS, VMS).
>Besides it got regular expressions, which means powerful search and replace
>operations. This is something few if any of the MSDOS editors can do. Besides
>VI supports most of what I want an editor to do. The few things that I would
>want in addition is not something I would want to give up VI for (or the
>functionality of VI).

Jove, a popular emacs editor that has been around for year and years, can
do all that. I have yet to run into a platform that could not support jove.
I just carry the source around and compile when I encounter a machine with-
out jove. I work between Unix and MS-DOS on a variety of hardware platforms
and I never have to learn a different editor. 

If vi supports most of what you want an editor to do, you must not be asking
much from your editor. I have yet to see a version of vi with common editing
functionality such as easy customization, easy manipulation of multiple
buffers/windows, running external programs over text in the editor (such as
spell checkers, syntax checkers, etc.), ability to automatically invoke make,
spell,lint, etc. and have the editor automatically track errors, filename
completion when searching for files that you don't recall the spelling,
editing tremendously large files, etc., etc., etc. And if there is such a
version (I believe UniPress has a version with several enhancements),
it would be a proprietary product that would probably not be available on
many platforms (and if it was ... at a substantial cost, for sure).

In shorter wording ... VI SUCKS!!! I have been around vi users all my life,
and the only reason that any of them refuse to *upgrade* to a decent editor
is that they are to lazy to invest the time to learn something new that will
make them more productive for the rest of their lives!

-former vi user;

feustel@netcom.COM (David Feustel) (06/01/91)

Sorry you feel that way about vi. I just got the tpu-based version of
Vi running on the VAX this morning and it is with great relief that I
stop using the standard VMS editors. You are correct that I don't look
for lots of stuff from the editor. This in part stems from the fact
that most of the sw projects I work on are large enough to warrant the
use of MAKE. So all I need is simple editing of whatever's broken,
followed by a :!make or a ZZmake if I feel confident.
-- 
David Feustel, 1930 Curdes Ave, Fort Wayne, IN 46805, (219) 482-9631
EMAIL: feustel@netcom.com  or feustel@cvax.ipfw.indiana.edu

clear@cavebbs.gen.nz (Charlie Lear) (06/01/91)

In article <1991May31.022942.25650@netcom.COM> feustel@netcom.COM (David Feustel) writes:
>I run on 4 or 5 different operating systems. VI is on all of them
>(including VMS as of today). I use VI on all of them so I only have to
>remember one editor.

I use vi on here because I don't have time to learn YABTE (Yet Another
Bloody Text Editor, in my case emacs). Its taken me two years to become
confident in using vi, and I'm not about to trash that effort lightly...

On Dos systems, I use Q-Edit. Its brilliant. I'll even get my shareware
registration cheque sent off one day, I promise.

Hint: it is repugnant, but in your own best interests to learn edlin.
You never know when you will be confronted with a box containing a nice
new PC and nothing on it apart from the standard DOS utils. Beats having
to retype an entire config.sys or autoexec by using COPY CON: when you
are debugging and setting the system up...

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Charlie "The Bear" Lear | clear@cavebbs.gen.nz | Kawasaki Z750GT  DoD#0221
The Cave MegaBBS  +64 4 642269 V22b | PO Box 2009, Wellington, New Zealand
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

userAKDU@mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA (Al Dunbar) (06/03/91)

In article <1991Jun01.110117.19901@cavebbs.gen.nz>, clear@cavebbs.gen.nz (Charlie Lear) writes:
>In article <1991May31.022942.25650@netcom.COM> feustel@netcom.COM (David Feustel) writes:
>>I run on 4 or 5 different operating systems. VI is on all of them
>>(including VMS as of today). I use VI on all of them so I only have to
>>remember one editor.
> 
>I use vi on here because I don't have time to learn YABTE (Yet Another
>Bloody Text Editor, in my case emacs). Its taken me two years to become
>confident in using vi, and I'm not about to trash that effort lightly...
> 
>On Dos systems, I use Q-Edit. Its brilliant. I'll even get my shareware
>registration cheque sent off one day, I promise.
 
Ditto to that, QEDIT is brilliant.
 
> 
>Hint: it is repugnant, but in your own best interests to learn edlin.
>You never know when you will be confronted with a box containing a nice
>new PC and nothing on it apart from the standard DOS utils. Beats having
>to retype an entire config.sys or autoexec by using COPY CON: when you
>are debugging and setting the system up...
> 
I usually try to have a copy of TED.COM with me at (almost) all
times for just such emergencies. Not as fully featured as QEDIT,
but for quick patches to CONFIG.SYS, AUTOEXEC.BAT, and other
.BAT files it is great.
 
 -------------------+-------------------------------------------
 Al Dunbar          | 
 Edmonton, Alberta  |  Disclaimer: "not much better than
 CANADA             |                  datclaimer"    
 -------------------+-------------------------------------------

glenn@welch.jhu.edu (Glenn M. Mason) (06/03/91)

In article <1991Jun01.110117.19901@cavebbs.gen.nz> clear@cavebbs.gen.nz (Charlie Lear) writes:
>In article <1991May31.022942.25650@netcom.COM> feustel@netcom.COM (David Feustel) writes:
>>I run on 4 or 5 different operating systems. VI is on all of them
>>(including VMS as of today). I use VI on all of them so I only have to
>>remember one editor.
>
>I use vi on here because I don't have time to learn YABTE (Yet Another
>Bloody Text Editor, in my case emacs). Its taken me two years to become
                                                     ^^^^^^^^^
>confident in using vi, and I'm not about to trash that effort lightly...

2 years? Are you serious?? Do you have a learning disability? If it took you
that long to become comfortable using vi, you probably should *not* attempt
to try anything better. I learned vi, just to be able to edit on the fly on
machines not equipped with an emacs-like editor of some sort ... I think I
studied the command set for about an hour or so, and I have been able to do
just about anything that you can possibly do with vi (which ain't much!-).

2 years???


;^)

thomas@ssd.kodak.com (Thomas B. Kinsman (37681)) (06/04/91)

In article <..19901@cavebbs.gen.nz> clear@cavebbs.gen.nz (Charlie Lear) writes:
>In article <1991May31.022942.25650@netcom.COM> feustel@netcom.COM (David Feustel) writes:
>>I run on 4 or 5 different operating systems. VI is on all of them
>>(including VMS as of today). I use VI on all of them so I only have to
>>remember one editor.
>
>I use vi on here because I don't have time to learn YABTE (Yet Another
>Bloody Text Editor, in my case emacs). Its taken me two years to become
>confident in using vi, and I'm not about to trash that effort lightly...
>
>On Dos systems, I use Q-Edit. Its brilliant. I'll even get my shareware
>registration cheque sent off one day, I promise.
>
>Hint: it is repugnant, but in your own best interests to learn edlin.
>You never know when you will be confronted with a box containing a nice
>new PC and nothing on it apart from the standard DOS utils...

Edlin:
(IMHO) Knowledge of some edlin is necessary.  This is obvious if you ever
put an error in your config.sys or autoexec.bat file.

VI:
You should know that vi is available for DOS.  In addition to the shareware
versions, MKS Inc. sells a commercial port of it.  Some of the shareware
versions are very small executables.  I used one when working on a floppy-only
laptop that was only 8K!  Compact code!

EMACS:
Versions of EMACS are also available for DOS.  Epsilon is a very nice one.
It can be had from a company in Pittsburgh, I think the company name is
Lugaru Software.

Q:
Q-Edit is very powerful.  A spiral bound manual for it which you can easily
browse is well worth the $10 or $15.  There is a lot more to Q than what
came with the README file I saw.
-- 
----
thomas@ssd.kodak.com	Voice: 716/477-9379(w)		Fax: 716/722-5008
Thomas B. Kinsman, Eastman Kodak Co., Flr 3, Bldg 65, RL, Roch., NY 14650-1805
"Knowledge is what's left when you throw the books away."	- A. Einstein

steveha@microsoft.UUCP (Steve HASTINGS) (06/04/91)

In article <1991May31.142911.6210@welch.jhu.edu> glenn@welchlab.welch.jhu.edu (Glenn M. Mason) writes:
>In shorter wording ... VI SUCKS!!! I have been around vi users all my life,
>and the only reason that any of them refuse to *upgrade* to a decent editor
>is that they are to lazy to invest the time to learn something new that will
>make them more productive for the rest of their lives!
>
>-former vi user;

There is no need to flame.  If you don't like vi, don't use it.  I know
over a dozen editors, and use vi by preference.  In the rare case that vi
doesn't do what I want, I switch to Programmer's WorkBench; I have done
that exactly twice in the past year.

Followups to /dev/null.  Editor flames waste time.

P.S. MKS makes a very good vi that works under DOS.
-- 
Steve "I don't speak for Microsoft" Hastings    ===^=== :::::
uunet!microsoft!steveha  steveha@microsoft.uucp    ` \\==|

feustel@netcom.COM (David Feustel) (06/04/91)

OK. You're smarter than we  are.
-- 
David Feustel, 1930 Curdes Ave, Fort Wayne, IN 46805, (219) 482-9631
EMAIL: feustel@netcom.com  or feustel@cvax.ipfw.indiana.edu

steve@shark.cs.fau.edu (Steve Smith) (06/05/91)

In article <4793@cocoa46.UUCP>, reichert@motcid.UUCP (Chuck KD9JQ) writes:
|> 
|> 	Question....what on earth for?   

Ah.....  A lost soul, unable to appreciate the pure beauty of vi.  

|> 
|> 	Chuck Reichert   KD9JQ

glenn@welch.jhu.edu (Glenn M. Mason) (06/05/91)

In article <1991Jun04.194630.10527@cs.fau.edu> steve@shark.cs.fau.edu (Steve Smith) writes:
>In article <4793@cocoa46.UUCP>, reichert@motcid.UUCP (Chuck KD9JQ) writes:
>|> 
>|> 	Question....what on earth for?   
>
>Ah.....  A lost soul, unable to appreciate the pure beauty of vi.  
                                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

... you are a very sick individual!

;^)

slootman@dri.nl (Paul Slootman) (06/05/91)

In article <1991Jun3.143356.26128@welch.jhu.edu>
glenn@welchlab.welch.jhu.edu (Glenn M. Mason) writes:
>In article <1991Jun01.110117.19901@cavebbs.gen.nz> clear@cavebbs.gen.nz (Charlie Lear) writes:
>>I use vi on here because I don't have time to learn YABTE (Yet Another
>>Bloody Text Editor, in my case emacs). Its taken me two years to become
                                                      ^^^^^^^^^
>>confident in using vi, and I'm not about to trash that effort lightly...

>2 years? Are you serious?? Do you have a learning disability? If it took you
>that long to become comfortable using vi, you probably should *not* attempt
>to try anything better. I learned vi, just to be able to edit on the fly on
>machines not equipped with an emacs-like editor of some sort ... I think I
>studied the command set for about an hour or so, and I have been able to do
>just about anything that you can possibly do with vi (which ain't much!-).
                                                       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Perhaps you think that because you've only studied it for about an hour or
so :-) I've used vi for about 6 years, and from time to time still
discover new features... (which, I agree, doesn't say too much about
the available documentation. That is IMHO the only serious thing wrong
with vi.)

Paul.
-- 
 ----------------
:slootman@dri.nl : When you get to the point where you think that nothing
:+ 31 5496 88831 : is impossible, try pushing toothpaste back into a tube
 ----------------

les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) (06/05/91)

In article <1991Jun3.143356.26128@welch.jhu.edu> glenn@welchlab.welch.jhu.edu (Glenn M. Mason) writes:

> I think I
>studied the command set for about an hour or so, and I have been able to do
>just about anything that you can possibly do with vi (which ain't much!-).

Either you learn a lot faster than the rest of us or you don't really
have any idea what vi can do (or perhaps your copy is a subset that
really can't do much...).

Do you do things like substitutions that swap field positions within
lines or upper/lower case conversions, cut and paste between files,
or filter chunks of your buffer through external programs.  Did you
really learn all that in an hour or did you cheat by already knowing
how regular expressions work?

Les Mikesell
  les@chinet.chi.il.us 

glenn@welch.jhu.edu (Glenn M. Mason) (06/06/91)

In article <1991Jun05.153324.25760@chinet.chi.il.us> les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) writes:
>In article <1991Jun3.143356.26128@welch.jhu.edu> glenn@welchlab.welch.jhu.edu (Glenn M. Mason) writes:
>
>> I think I
>>studied the command set for about an hour or so, and I have been able to do
>>just about anything that you can possibly do with vi (which ain't much!-).
> ...
>Do you do things like substitutions that swap field positions within
>lines or upper/lower case conversions, cut and paste between files,
>or filter chunks of your buffer through external programs.  Did you
>really learn all that in an hour or did you cheat by already knowing
>how regular expressions work?

I cheated! Well ... I guess ya got me. Hard to work within a Unix environ-
ment for very long without using regular expressions.

;^)

Seems to me that Bill Joy was quoted a while back saying something to
the effect that "vi is a turd" ... some software is so bad that it falls
into the "software that only the author could love" category, and vi
seems to fall short of making even that grade!

henry@ADS.COM (Henry Mensch) (06/06/91)

steveha@microsoft.UUCP (Steve Hastings) wrote: 
->There is no need to flame.  If you don't like vi, don't use it.  I know
->over a dozen editors, and use vi by preference.  In the rare case that vi
->doesn't do what I want, I switch to Programmer's WorkBench; I have done
->that exactly twice in the past year.

indeed ... different strokes for different folks, and all that ... i
run an emacs all day long, but i'm editing this article with vi.  this
all happens on a UNIX box, but i do this on my original IBM PC/AT at
home, too ...

--
# Henry Mensch / Advanced Decision Systems / <henry@ads.com>

RAMontante <bobmon@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu> (06/07/91)

glenn@welchlab.welch.jhu.edu (Glenn M. Mason) writes:
| 
| > I think I
| >studied the command set for about an hour or so, and I have been able to do
| >just about anything that you can possibly do with vi (which ain't much!-).
                                                         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Full-featured vi and emacs share the property of doing anything which can
be done, in a sense --- that is to say, macros exist for both editors which
implement Turing machines.  So if you can't do something in vi (or in emacs,
given five times as many keystrokes) it's your fault, not the editor's.

:-)

glenn@welch.jhu.edu (Glenn M. Mason) (06/08/91)

In article <1991Jun7.111929.8902@news.cs.indiana.edu> bobmon@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (RAMontante) writes:
>glenn@welchlab.welch.jhu.edu (Glenn M. Mason) writes:
>| 
>| > I think I
>| >studied the command set for about an hour or so, and I have been able to do
>| >just about anything that you can possibly do with vi (which ain't much!-).
>                                                         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>Full-featured vi and emacs share the property of doing anything which can
>be done, in a sense --- that is to say, macros exist for both editors which
>implement Turing machines.  So if you can't do something in vi (or in emacs,
>given five times as many keystrokes) it's your fault, not the editor's.

Then I have a few questions for you which are directed at a standard
implementation of vi on a Unix platform. If vi can do "anything that can
be done" via mocro customization, please show me how to accomplish the
following things ... because if you can, I may actually *use* vi:


Can you show me how to customize vi to display 2 or more files for
simultaneous editing?

Can you tell me how to get vi to use filename completion when I forget the
name of a file I want to edit when I am already in vi ... like commanding
vi to "e <partial_filename>" , then tell vi to display for me a list of
files in the working directory that match that expression?

Can you show me how to customize vi to split the display and allow me to
edit 1 or more files in multiple windows/buffers while giving me an inter-
active shell in another window to access the OS while I am editing ... all
accomplished by never leaving the editor?

Can you show me how to get vi to run an OS command in a window so that I
can edit, cut and paste, etc. the OS command output for use within a file
that I am editing?

Can you show me how to customize vi to run 'make' and automatically bring
into the editor source files and move the cursor to the point of syntax
errors ... and move forward/backward from/to next error and/or source
file tracking each error (just like many integrated edit/compile/debug
environments that come with many PC-based language systems?

Can you show me how to edit a document in vi and ask vi to invoke 'spell'
over the text and then move the cursor forward/backward tracking possible
spelling errors at the touch of a key (only after I have been given a
chance to edit the list of possible mistakes, deleting the entries that
I know are spelled correctly and may not be in the dictionary)?

Can you tell me how to make vi push and pop directories so that I can
move around easily and edit different files in different directories
without leaving ther editor (oh yeah ... and if I forget the name of the
directories, I want vi to help me out with their names as well)?

Can you tell me how I can make vi map any particular function that it
is capable of to a keystroke that I am comfortable with?

Can you show me how to make vi *warn* me that the file I am attempting
to save has been saved to disk after I invoked vi on the file (which
means that someone edited and saved the file within the time I was
editing the same file)?

Can you tell me how to customize vi to give on-line, context-sensitive
help text for *any* possible function that vi has?

Can you show me how to make vi aware that when I type a certain word
abbreviation, vi really knows that I want the abbreviation expanded?

Can you show me how to make vi display the time or date in an obscure
portion of the screen, or notify me that new mail has arrived, or display
the name of the file I am editing, or tell me what editing mode I am in?


If you can show me how to do any of these things, I'd really like to
know how! Because these are just *some* of the features that I want in an
editor and already have with no customization at all. These features are
all available within Jove which is a free, public-domain program ... and
Jove is an excellent editor but is really just an emacs implementation
that is merely a subset of most of the more powerful emacs implementations
available. 

If these things can be done in vi, show me *how* it can be done, because
I would be very interested in knowing how to customize vi to do some of
these things ... and I'm sure there are other vi users out there that
would like to know as well! Show me!!


Glenn

feustel@netcom.COM (David Feustel) (06/08/91)

Just out of curiosity, do you have the phrase "can you show me how to
make vi" attached to one of your macro keys?
-- 
David Feustel, 1930 Curdes Ave, Fort Wayne, IN 46805, (219) 482-9631
EMAIL: feustel@netcom.com  or feustel@cvax.ipfw.indiana.edu

mrd@ecs.soton.ac.uk (Mark Dobie) (06/10/91)

In <1991Jun7.172233.7978@welch.jhu.edu> glenn@welch.jhu.edu (Glenn M. Mason) writes:

>Then I have a few questions for you which are directed at a standard
>implementation of vi on a Unix platform. If vi can do "anything that can
>be done" via mocro customization, please show me how to accomplish the
>following things ... because if you can, I may actually *use* vi:

Here's my best shot at some of them. If you want better answers, ask in
comp.editors where the REAL(tm) vi gurus live. I learned most of what
I know there. By the way, we should only really talk about things that
*manipulate the files*, rather than how the editor displays things
etc.

>Can you show me how to customize vi to display 2 or more files for
>simultaneous editing?

I assume you mean *editing* 2 or more files for simultaneous
*display*. No way that I know of. This isn't to do with the files.

>Can you tell me how to get vi to use filename completion when I forget the
>name of a file I want to edit when I am already in vi ... like commanding
>vi to "e <partial_filename>" , then tell vi to display for me a list of
>files in the working directory that match that expression?

If you will settle for wildcards, then :n file will work. If not, you
could write a macro that ran ls, showed you the output (in a temp
file), let you pick one and then loaded it with :e. Not quite the
same, but nearly there.

>Can you show me how to customize vi to split the display and allow me to
>edit 1 or more files in multiple windows/buffers while giving me an inter-
>active shell in another window to access the OS while I am editing ... all
>accomplished by never leaving the editor?

Is this really necessary? If you do it, each window is tiny, unless
you have a windowing system, in which case you don't need to do it.

>Can you show me how to get vi to run an OS command in a window so that I
>can edit, cut and paste, etc. the OS command output for use within a file
>that I am editing?

:.!dir should replace the current line with the output of dir (or
whatever) in your file.

>Can you show me how to customize vi to run 'make' and automatically bring
>into the editor source files and move the cursor to the point of syntax
>errors ... and move forward/backward from/to next error and/or source
>file tracking each error (just like many integrated edit/compile/debug
>environments that come with many PC-based language systems?

Macros for doing this basically take the compiler output into another
file and then you have macros to move between the error positions. The
macros must know about the format of the compiler error messages. Some
vi's have this built in (stevie?, maybe elvis).

>Can you show me how to edit a document in vi and ask vi to invoke 'spell'
>over the text and then move the cursor forward/backward tracking possible
>spelling errors at the touch of a key (only after I have been given a
>chance to edit the list of possible mistakes, deleting the entries that
>I know are spelled correctly and may not be in the dictionary)?

Similar to the make problem. spell is run over the entire file
(:%!spell -b) and the output saved somewhere. Macros search for the
misspelled words in the original text. Of course you can edit the
spelling errors wherever they are saved (either on the end of the
original, or in a temp file).

>Can you tell me how to make vi push and pop directories so that I can
>move around easily and edit different files in different directories
>without leaving ther editor (oh yeah ... and if I forget the name of the
>directories, I want vi to help me out with their names as well)?

No way (I think). Not file manipulation though.

>Can you tell me how I can make vi map any particular function that it
>is capable of to a keystroke that I am comfortable with?

:map <key> <commands>

Key can be almost any key, special ones escaped by ctrl-V. Commands
are simply the keystrokes you would type to do it manually (again.
special ones (like escape and return) escaped with ctrl-V). This can
work in command mode and editing mode (if you use :map!)

>Can you show me how to make vi *warn* me that the file I am attempting
>to save has been saved to disk after I invoked vi on the file (which
>means that someone edited and saved the file within the time I was
>editing the same file)?

On a PC? Not sure on a UNIX machine either. Maybe it could ls -l and
check the timestamps. (YUK).

>Can you tell me how to customize vi to give on-line, context-sensitive
>help text for *any* possible function that vi has?

Tags would be good for this. ctrl-] looks up the current word in a
file called "tags" and jumps to a specific place in another file
(specified in the tags file). ctrl-^ takes you back to where you were.
You would need a tutorial on vi and a program to generate the tags
file of places to jump to for each command.

Tags are usually used for jumping to function definitions in C
programs. Elvis comes with a ctags program which lets you do this. Its
brill. I know of no other system that has it (emacs probably does).

>Can you show me how to make vi aware that when I type a certain word
>abbreviation, vi really knows that I want the abbreviation expanded?

:abbrev <abbreviation> <expansion> will do it as you type. If you have
lots of these set up it can slow things down a little. One use might
be for common programming constructs (eg a function definition).

>Can you show me how to make vi display the time or date in an obscure
>portion of the screen, or notify me that new mail has arrived, or display
>the name of the file I am editing, or tell me what editing mode I am in?

Many vi's have :set showmode (or something similar) to display the
editing mode. ctrl-G will display details of the file you are
editing. The rest you can do with other programs (both on PC and UNIX
systems).

>If you can show me how to do any of these things, I'd really like to
>know how! Because these are just *some* of the features that I want in an
>editor and already have with no customization at all. These features are
>all available within Jove which is a free, public-domain program ... and
>Jove is an excellent editor but is really just an emacs implementation
>that is merely a subset of most of the more powerful emacs implementations
>available. 

Well, if you are happy with emacs you should be able to have most of
it. I have never got to grips with emacs (one day...).

>If these things can be done in vi, show me *how* it can be done, because
>I would be very interested in knowing how to customize vi to do some of
>these things ... and I'm sure there are other vi users out there that
>would like to know as well! Show me!!

Alas, I have not provided much detail because I am (relatively) new to
vi macros and have never implemented anything like this. There are
macro sets to do some of the things you want (spelling and error messages)
and the rest are mostly possible, but with work.

Last but not least, my recommended PC vi is elvis. It does all this
and more.

				Mark. (phew)
-- 
Mark Dobie                              M.Dobie@uk.ac.soton.ecs (JANET)
University of Southampton		M.Dobie@ecs.soton.ac.uk (Bitnet)

rfh3273@galileo.rtn.ca.boeing.com (Dick Harrigill) (06/15/91)

In article <1991Jun7.172233.7978@welch.jhu.edu> glenn@welchlab.welch.jhu.edu (Glenn M. Mason) writes:
>If vi can do "anything that can
>be done" via mocro customization, please show me how to accomplish the
>following things ... because if you can, I may actually *use* vi:
>
>Can you show me how to ..........................

My list is much simpler:

Can you show me *ANYTHING* in vi that a typial vi novice could figure out 
the keystroke sequence for him/herself without referring to a manual?

-- 
Dick Harrigill, an independent voice from:     Boeing Commercial Airplanes 
M/S 9R-49  PO BOX 3707                       Renton Avionics/Flight Systems
Seattle, WA  91824                                  Computing Support
(206) 393-9539     rfh3273@galileo.rtn.ca.boeing.com

glenn@welch.jhu.edu (Glenn M. Mason) (06/15/91)

In article <426@galileo.rtn.ca.boeing.com> rfh3273@galileo.rtn.ca.boeing.com (Dick Harrigill) writes:
>In article <1991Jun7.172233.7978@welch.jhu.edu> glenn@welchlab.welch.jhu.edu (Glenn M. Mason) writes:
>>If vi can do "anything that can
>>be done" via mocro customization, please show me how to accomplish the
>>following things ... because if you can, I may actually *use* vi:
>>
>>Can you show me how to ..........................
>
>My list is much simpler:
>
>Can you show me *ANYTHING* in vi that a typial vi novice could figure out 
>the keystroke sequence for him/herself without referring to a manual?


I can show you how to add more power, extensibility and flexibility to your
editing capabilities while greatly increasing your productivity and generally
lowering your stress level ... and you can accomplish this all FROM WITHIN
VI:

. . .
~
~
~
~
:q!

> man jove

;^)


I think that Ed Wright said it best in his .sig file:
-----
I think I've got the hang of it now .... :w  :q  :wq  :wq! ^d  X exit ^X^C
^[x  X Q  :quitbye  CtrlAltDel   ~~q  :~q  logout  save/quit :!QUIT ^[zz ^[ZZ
ZZZZ  ^H  ^@  ^L  ^[c  ^# ^E ^X ^I ^T  ?  help  helpquit ^D  ^d ^C ^c help
^]q  exit ?Quit ?q  anybackbone!sequent!edw edw@sequent.COM  KA9AHQ 28.340
-----

... or in layman's terms ... "vi SUCKS!!!"


Glenn
-- 
Glenn M. Mason, Senior Research Programmer/Analyst
Laboratory for Applied Research in Academic Information
William H. Welch Medical Library, The Johns Hopkins University
uucp: ...!uunet!welch!glenn			 (301)955-9658

mroussel@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Marc Roussel) (06/16/91)

In article <426@galileo.rtn.ca.boeing.com> rfh3273@galileo.rtn.ca.boeing.com
(Dick Harrigill) writes:
>Can you show me *ANYTHING* in vi that a typial vi novice could figure out 
>the keystroke sequence for him/herself without referring to a manual?

No, but then is this true of any editor?

				Marc R. Roussel
                                mroussel@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca

lennes@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Bob Lennes) (06/17/91)

In article <1991Jun16.082652.21466@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca> mroussel@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Marc Roussel) writes:
>In article <426@galileo.rtn.ca.boeing.com> rfh3273@galileo.rtn.ca.boeing.com
>(Dick Harrigill) writes:
>>Can you show me *ANYTHING* in vi that a typial vi novice could figure out 
>>the keystroke sequence for him/herself without referring to a manual?
>
>No, but then is this true of any editor?
>
Yes. Try the QEdit editor by SemWare. Even a Mac user could figure it out.

BOB

tarjeij@ulrik.uio.no (Tarjei Jensen) (06/17/91)

I learnt VI by using a A4 quick reference sheet printed on both sides. Now I
have a book on VI (no good) and miss my sheet desperateley.

--
// Tarjei T. Jensen - if it ain't broken, fix it anyway!
//    tarjeij@ulrik.uio.no       || +47 87 21138
// Working, but not speaking for the Norwegian National Library.

jpc@fct.unl.pt (Jose Pina Coelho) (06/17/91)

In article <426@galileo.rtn.ca.boeing.com>
rfh3273@galileo.rtn.ca.boeing.com (Dick Harrigill) writes: 

   Can you show me *ANYTHING* in vi that a typial vi novice could figure out 
   the keystroke sequence for him/herself without referring to a manual?

:!man vi

Of course you need man for MsDos :-)




--
Jose Pedro T. Pina Coelho   | BITNET/Internet: jpc@fct.unl.pt
Rua Jau N 1, 2 Dto          | UUCP: ...!mcsun!unl!jpc
1300 Lisboa, PORTUGAL       | Home phone: (+351) (1) 640767

Sex is not the answer.  Sex is the question.  "Yes" is the answer.

rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold) (06/20/91)

In article <1991Jun16.082652.21466@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca> mroussel@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Marc Roussel) writes:
>In article <426@galileo.rtn.ca.boeing.com> rfh3273@galileo.rtn.ca.boeing.com
>(Dick Harrigill) writes:
>>Can you show me *ANYTHING* in vi that a typial vi novice could figure out 
>>the keystroke sequence for him/herself without referring to a manual?
>
>No, but then is this true of any editor?

QEDIT. FullWrite II.  Any GUI editor.  Brief.  ProTerm. 1Word.  Microsoft
Word.  Sprint.  SideKick.  EDT.

All you have to know is "ESC" or "F1" or "Alt-h", the three keys I always
go for when I don't know a new program.  Some of them give you help, some
of them will pop up a set of menus that you can also use, and always include
a list of keys.  Some of those are word processors, some are true programmers
editors, some are both.

The most heinous thing about vi as far as a novice is concerned is the two
modes.  You edit a file, you see a cursor, and you can't type without
mangling your file with command sequences.  Then once you manage to find
out that "I" or "R" or "A" lets you start typing (but not "i"!) you reach
for the arrow keys to move around and end up sticking hundreds of lines
of A A A B B C D E in your file.  With all the rules and modes, there's no
way a beginner is going to learn vi unless he has a manual, someone who
knows it, or has a lot of time to waste.  The worst thing is that you can't
just ignore most of this crap.  In most editors even if you've never seen them
before you can make minor changes to a file with the arrow keys, delete key,
and (the "hard" part) saving and exiting.  Not with vi.
-- 
Standard disclaimer applies, you legalistic hacks.     |     Ron Dippold