Re: Hidden-code flaw in Windows renews worries over stealthly malware
From: Hairy One Kenobi (abuse_at_[127.0.0.1)
Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2005 00:00:12 GMT
"Shadus" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote in message
> On 2005-09-01, Jim Watt <email@example.com_way> blabbed:
> > I gave up on SCO because of editing in vi
> Lol, vi (vim specifically) is my favorite editor. It's simple,
> powerful, and does everything I could want out of an editor for source
> code, text files, configs, etc. I can use emacs in a pinch, jed, jove,
> pico, nano, whatever. I prefer vi, even use it in windows when I'm
> forced to work there.
> To give up an entire os because you don't like/can't grasp its default
> editor seems... eh nevermind, it speaks for itself.
> > All this cryptic stuff is very fine, but these days now
> > storage is cheap its utility is outweighed by the trouble
> > in learning it and getting it right.
> I don't understand what you think is cryptic, especially since the
> original thread regarded the registery if I remember right. The
> original point if memory serves was that unix config files are much
> simplier than the registry and safer too since a single change in one
> value won't leave your machine in an unbootable state.
LMAO on that one - VI is a perfectly reasonable line editor (first used 'em
on Cyber mainframes), but a fairly poor excuse for the FSEs that emerged in
the 1980s. Heck, EVE showed how to convert a perfectly good VAX line-editor
into an excellent FSE. More than two decades ago.
And even modern editors could learn a few tricks from the 300kB or so of
MultiEdit (1988, DOS 3.01 or higher, if memory serves).
Anyway - the argument's pointless unless you've ever used CED Pro 2.
Blitters /rock/, when it comes to editing ;o)
-- Hairy One Kenobi Disclaimer: the opinions expressed in this opinion do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the highly-opinionated person expressing the opinion in the first place. So there!