On Thu, Sep 17, 1998 at 10:14:07PM -0500, dsb3 wrote: > >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... If you migrate to a free email client such as mutt, you'll find pico painful tu use. Also, vi you say? Well, if you like the vim variant (I do) see /usr/doc/vim-rt/examples/mail for an example of how to deal with mail. linewrap, paragraph reformat, ispell (though I need to analyze this and Do It Differently, I need spell word--I don't trust spell file and I think that's what it does) > 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 > look-in. As I said, check it out for mail too. > 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. Indeed. That's why I like programmable editors like joe and to a smaller extent (because I don't understand how to program it) vim.
Description: PGP signature