Re: Info sucks?
On Thu, 17 Sep 1998, Philip Thiem wrote:
>Hamish Moffatt wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 17, 1998 at 12:09:41AM -0500, Philip Thiem wrote:
>> > and that's how open it. Pico, is by far an very simplistic editor, and
>> > I used it extensively for a long time. Info if you use info is not
>> pico is painful painful painful. I would rather use EDLIN, quite seriously.
>pico is still simplicity all the key are at the bottom. It though is a
>very weak editor.
Just to add my $0.005 to the discussion. I use pico for emails because it
(1) comes nicely integrated with PINE and (2) is easier for email style
writing. It auto wraps moderately well. It has a paragraph format
control sequence, a line delete sequence and that's pretty much all I find
myself needing for email 99.5% of the time. The other 0.05% of the time I
just pipe the text out to vi and do whatever...
I use vim for other text editing because it's moderately lightweight.
emacs loaded too slow while I was choosing my editor path so didn't get a
To be honest I've forgotten how this whole thread started, but lets not
forget that a text editor should be suited to the task at hand. To take
the discussion a stage further, linux is far from perfect. Yet what
matters is that it does (for me) everything that's critical, most of
what's desirable and until I either write stuff or wait for other people
to write stuff that suits me just fine.
| oOOooO / firstname.lastname@example.org
--| oOobodoO / We're just two lost souls, swimming in a
--| ooOoOo / fish bowl, year after year. Running over
| II / the same old ground, what have we found,
| II / The same old fears. Wish you were Here.