Difference: EditorVi (4 vs. 5)

Revision 52020-09-21 - PeterSchmid

  META TOPICPARENT 
 name="WebHome" 

 vi Editor
- META TOPICPARENT
+ name="WebHome"
-<
<
+I have not used vi for a very long time. The vi EMACS war is over and others have won. I was looking for a tiny editor which can be easy adapted and embed into a (Forth) system.
->
>
+I have not used vi for a very long time. The vi EMACS war is over but others have won. I was looking for a tiny editor which can be easily adapted and embedded into a (Forth) system. But for me vi is better suited for restricted (embedded) systems.
-<
<
+This vi has its origin from BusyBox tiny vi. 
 The program is resident. The buffer too. You can leave the program without saving, do some work on the command line and go back to vi and continue the edit task. 
  The buffer is restricted to 40 KiB. Large files have to be split up.
->
>
+To see a screen full with ~ at the beginning of the lines makes me happy.

This vi has its origin from BusyBox tiny vi. But there are some differences: 

 The program is resident. The text buffer and other buffers too. You can leave the program without saving, do some work on the command line and go back to vi and continue the edit task. 
  The text buffer is restricted to 40 KiB. Large files have to be split up.
  Mecrisp Forth uses DOS/Windows style line endings carriage return and line feed ("\r\n"). Unix (and vi) uses just line feed ("\n").
  The command v evaluates a line.
-<
<
+Turbo Pascal IDE (Wordstar), EDT, vi, EMACS, IDE (Eclipse, NetBeans, EWARM)
->
>
+My editor history: 
 CP/M Turbo Pascal Editor (Wordstar) OKI if800, Z80 Assembler, Pascal, 1984
  UNIX Rand Editor, Perkin Elmer, 1985
  VMS EDT MicroVAX, Pascal, Oracle DB, 1987
  vi (MKS Toolkit) IBM PC DOS cross-assembler for NEC's 75X 4-bit MCUs, Coherent OS, Linux, 1988
  UNIX EMACS as system administrator for DEC Tru64 UNIX, SUN Solaris, and Linux servers, 1996
  IDE (Eclipse, NetBeans, EWARM), 2010

View topic | History: r17 < r16 < r15 < r14 | More topic actions...