Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on May 03, 2006 09:06 PM
Finally, because vi starts so much more quickly than emacs means that they can spend their time using UNIX instead of using EMACS for the other tasks that need to be done.
Yes, vi starts quicker and is much more convenient than emacs for editing single files. But the slow startup isn't so bad that it would steal you that much time. And usually, emacs users won't start it for every file from a console. They have dired, buffers and eshell. It's a different working philosophy. I'm still tempted to switch over to vi because of the awkward key sequences (might try out viper-mode first<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)), but I think emacs provides better hacking/tweaking experience. I guess both need a lot of time to learn, but I think both are worth it.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re:Too much bloat.
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on May 03, 2006 09:06 PMYes, vi starts quicker and is much more convenient than emacs for editing single files. But the slow startup isn't so bad that it would steal you that much time. And usually, emacs users won't start it for every file from a console. They have dired, buffers and eshell. It's a different working philosophy. I'm still tempted to switch over to vi because of the awkward key sequences (might try out viper-mode first<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)), but I think emacs provides better hacking/tweaking experience.
I guess both need a lot of time to learn, but I think both are worth it.
#