Back to home page

DOS ain't dead

Forum index page

Log in | Register

Search:  
Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view

Aurora vs. others (Announce)

posted by Rugxulo Homepage, Usono, 04.06.2008, 02:06
(edited by Rugxulo on 04.06.2008, 16:04)

> > They say that Emacs is hard on the hand but vi is hard on the brain.
>
> They also say: "Emacs: great OS, bad editor"
"Eight Megs And Constantly Swapping" (man, how times have changed)

> Only on the free unices. On commercial ones you are sometimes stuck with
> ed and "echo *" for dir, or worse, doing it with cat
Yuck. They should install vi (steVIe and XVI are pretty small ... or even e3vi).

> Actually yesterday, I installed NetBSD on PPC, and it took me back to the
> days of Unix yore.
In what way? Isn't NetBSD supposed to be pretty good? (But yeah, they have some weird stuff there, I guess.)

> > P.S. I know you (marcov) already knew that vi was a full-screen visual
> > improvement to ex, which was an improved ed (regex line editing,
> whee!).
>
> And for dos users, ...edlin... The horror!
Which nobody ever uses (no regex). It wasn't until MS-DOS 5 that a full-screen editor (QBASIC in disguise) was bundled (although DR-DOS had one from 3.x, supposedly). The EDIT from Win95 is finally separate from QB, and it supports LFNs and multiple windows but always expands tabs (IIRC), so I still prefer other tools (TDE, VILE). In fact, Vista even comes with the improved DOS/MZ EDIT.COM (69k, Help -> About says "Copyright 1995", even runs in DOSBox) as well as EDLIN.EXE (12k DOS/MZ .EXE! probably from MS-DOS 5).

EDIT: Corrected error.

---
Know your limits.h

Post reply
 

Complete thread:

Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view
22632 Postings in 2109 Threads, 402 registered users, 423 users online (0 registered, 423 guests)
DOS ain't dead | Admin contact
RSS Feed
powered by my little forum