[Ann][Goodie] SVI -- a VI for Squeak.
sps2000 at mail.com
Wed Apr 10 23:44:13 UTC 2002
Michael Conlen wrote:
>I just hope that the vi port to Squeak is not vim... ...port emacs all you
>want, just no vim, please :)
Sorry, it is modelled on vim. At the risk of a little scorching, why is
VI ok but not VIM?
In defense of SVI (I did write it, after all), it has a couple of
features that I've seen mentioned as some of the strong aspects of
emacs. First, it can take multikey bindings, which are mapped to
selectors. This is a subtle point, but is emphasized in emacs' docs --
eg. you're not really calling 'j' when you hit 'j' -- you are calling
the selector "#doLineDown". Second, emacs is often touted because you
have LISP at your disposal. SVI has a similar feature that VI and VIM
don't have, except instead of LISP it's Squeak. The 2 things combined
make SVI very malleable.
I've not used emacs enough to get the gestalt of the beast, but I'm
going to presume that your average emacs adherent's objection to VI goes
beyond the keybindings chosen. (If it *is* that simple, an option to SVI
to use emacs-ish keybindings can easily be added). I'm interested in
hearing from the cult of emacs -- what would have to be added to SVI to
make it more palettable to you?
>Groove On Dude
>meconlen at obfuscated.net
More information about the Squeak-dev