gwoho@nntp-server.caltech.edu (g liu) (11/07/90)
i looked around for a free version of vi, and stevie, which is a good clone, is the bese i found. if i wrote a real clone of ex/vi, would i beable to get any money for it? i dont want to spend 100 hours of my life writing a vi editor for its own sake: it would save much less than 100 hours of making a junk editor work. gwoho liu.
venta@otello.sublink.org (Paolo Ventafridda) (11/07/90)
In article <1990Nov6.193301.7727@nntp-server.caltech.edu>, gwoho@nntp-server.caltech.edu (g liu) writes: > i looked around for a free version of vi, and stevie, which is > a good clone, is the bese i found. if i wrote a real clone > of ex/vi, would i beable to get any money for it? why bother to re-invent the wheel? What the unix world misses is a Word Processor. As far as i know, there are no public domain WPs around, and those available from sw vendors are pretty expensive. A simple word-wrapping/right-justif. without any printer control (i.e. simple output to file, then your business to print it) would make a lot of people happy (at least me). I dont want to spend 1000$ for a WP which -in the DOS world- would be simply FREE (that is, you just pay that much for it's under Unix). I am willing to support a shareware WP for 100$, though. I think that rewriting ex/vi is far much more difficult than writing a simple but workable WP from scratch. Of course you'll have your own reasons to clone vi; i am just putting an idea. Something i am thinking about since i knew how much Word was costing for my old 3b2. Greetings from italy Paolo -- Paolo Ventafridda -*- INTERNET: venta@otello.sublink.org TELEMATIX MILANO - Via C.Gomes 10, 20124 Milano - +39-2-6706012
chrise@hpnmdla.HP.COM (Chris Eich) (11/08/90)
gwoho asks:
is it possable to mget any money if i write a version of vi?
You don't need to do any work, just do this:
$ ftp ft-knox.treasury.gov
Connected to ft-knox.treasury.gov.
220 ft-knox.treasury.gov FTP server (Version $Revision: 1.20 $ $Date: 88/12/08 10:04:14 $) ready.
Name (ft-knox.treasury.gov:chrise): ftp
Password (ft-knox.treasury.gov:ftp):
331 Guest login ok, send ident as password.
230 Guest login ok, access restrictions apply.
ftp> cd pub
200 CWD command okay.
ftp> prompt
Interactive mode off.
ftp> binary # This step is very important!
200 Type set to I.
ftp> mget money*
200 PORT command okay.
150 Opening data connection for money1 (15.4.41.245,23756) (408 $).
226 Transfer complete.
408 $ received in 0.01 seconds (41.30 K$/sec)
200 PORT command okay.
150 Opening data connection for money2 (15.4.41.245,23757) (6481 $).
226 Transfer complete.
6481 $ received in 0.01 seconds (431.70 K$/sec)
200 PORT command okay.
150 Opening data connection for money3 (15.4.41.245,23758) (56152 $).
226 Transfer complete.
56152 $ received in 0.46 seconds (119.86 K$/sec)
200 PORT command okay.
150 Opening data connection for money4 (15.4.41.245,23759) (73728 $).
226 Transfer complete.
73728 $ received in 1.11 seconds (64.68 K$/sec)
200 PORT command okay.
150 Opening data connection for money5 (15.4.41.245,23760) (85294 $).
226 Transfer complete.
85294 $ received in 0.78 seconds (106.44 K$/sec)
ftp> bye
As you can see, it is very easy to mget quite a bit of money in no time
at all.
Chrisbhoughto@cmdnfs.intel.com (Blair P. Houghton) (11/08/90)
In article <940@otello.sublink.org> venta@otello.sublink.org (Paolo Ventafridda) writes: >why bother to re-invent the wheel? Why indeed? >A simple word-wrapping/right-justif. without any printer control RTFM nroff(1). The vi-macro using nroff to double-justify text is fairly simple. It's probably in the FAQ for comp.unix.questions, in fact. >I think that rewriting ex/vi is far much more difficult than >writing a simple but workable WP from scratch. vi(1) and emacs(1gnu) are _extensible_ (especially emacs, which is more of a build-it-yourself editor kit than an actual editor.) Maarten (anyone?) should email you a copy of the vi reference. I think you'd be amazed how powerful that little editor is. (Maart - I'd do it myself, but my copy is on a tape in a box behind the-- well, you get the picture...) --Blair "I'd do it myself, but my brain is on a tape in a box behind the -- well, you get the picture..."
jik@athena.mit.edu (Jonathan I. Kamens) (11/09/90)
In article <940@otello.sublink.org>, venta@otello.sublink.org (Paolo Ventafridda) writes: |> why bother to re-invent the wheel? |> What the unix world misses is a Word Processor. As far as i know, |> there are no public domain WPs around, and those available from |> sw vendors are pretty expensive. |> |> A simple word-wrapping/right-justif. without any printer control |> (i.e. simple output to file, then your business to print it) would |> make a lot of people happy (at least me). GNU emacs supports word-wrapping and right-justification, although you'd have a little trouble getting it to display anything like underlining, italics, etc., in a WYSIWYG form. If you're willing to settle for plain characters, then emacs can do what you want. Granted, it's copylefted rather than public domain, but it's close enough for all intents and purposes as long as you're willing to make the source code available to anybody using it who asks for it. Furthermore, the program EZ written in the Andrew toolkit (developed at CMU) is pretty much WYSIWYG, including multiple fonts, spacing, justification, etc. I believe the andrew software is freely redistributable; in fact, it may even be on the X11R4 contrib tape. So it's not quite true that there are "no public domain WP's" available for Unix. -- Jonathan Kamens USnail: MIT Project Athena 11 Ashford Terrace jik@Athena.MIT.EDU Allston, MA 02134 Office: 617-253-8085 Home: 617-782-0710