Elvis vs. stevie

[Andy Tanenbaum]

We now seem to have have two vi clones, stevie and elvis. I am willing to
include one of them as a permanent part of the system, but not both given
their sizes and my dislike for vi. (I use ELLE both on MINIX and on my
Sun workstation at the university.)

No doubt elvis has some initial bugs, as all new software does, but as that
gets straightened out, I would be interested in having vi/stevie/elvis
users start a discussion in the newsgroup about the relative merits of stevie
and elvis, including functionality, bugginess, performance, and other factors
important to vi users.

I probably won't contribute much, but I will read it.

If some consensus forms, at some point in the future, I'd like to get a
well-tested version of the winner.

Andy Tanenbaum (a...@cs.vu.nl)

[Peter da Silva]

I wouldn't even consider Stevie as a "standard" editor. It's a very
limited subset of vi. I'd rather use microemacs (and have). Elvis, on
the other hand, supports almost all of vi's capabilities. Steve seems
to have started with the line-mode as the basis for the implementation,
just like the real thing.
--
_--_|\ Peter da Silva. +1 713 274 5180. <pe...@ficc.uu.net>.
/ \
\_.--._/ Xenix Support -- it's not just a job, it's an adventure!
v "Have you hugged your wolf today?" `-_-'

[Dennis P. Bednar]

In article <GL810P...@ficc.uu.net>, pe...@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes:
> Elvis, on
> the other hand, supports almost all of vi's capabilities.

Could you be more specific about the vi features in elvis but not
in stevie? By the way, I've ported stevie version 3.69 to Intel's
iRMX-286, and really like it. Most of the work involved writing
code (a new system-dependent rmx.c file) to put the terminal in
raw mode, and to not prematurely exit the editor if you type
^C interrupt.
--
Dennis Bednar uunet!virtech!dennis (703)760-3357(w) (703)437-4384(h)
Cable & Wireless, Tysons Corner VA

[Kevin Benton]

In article <GL810P...@ficc.uu.net> pe...@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes:
>I wouldn't even consider Stevie as a "standard" editor. It's a very
>limited subset of vi. I'd rather use microemacs (and have). Elvis, on
>the other hand, supports almost all of vi's capabilities. Steve seems
>to have started with the line-mode as the basis for the implementation,
>just like the real thing.

How about posting the MicroEmacs diffs that you used and a version number
so many of us can enjoy the many benifits of the far superior macros of
Micro-Emacs (especially since it does what it's truly supposed to, and has
a much wider support base).

Kevin

[Jwahar R. Bammi]

In article <76...@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> ben...@VAX1.CC.UAKRON.EDU (Kevin Benton) writes:

> In article <GL810P...@ficc.uu.net> pe...@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes:
> >I wouldn't even consider Stevie as a "standard" editor. It's a very

> How about posting the MicroEmacs diffs that you used and a version number
> so many of us can enjoy the many benifits of the far superior macros of
> Micro-Emacs (especially since it does what it's truly supposed to, and has
> a much wider support base).

i dont know which version etc peter was talking about. the
following versions of MicroEmacs are available for minix-atariST (ie:
they have'nt been tested on a Pc so i dont know if they will work):

MicroEmacs v3.10 ported by Kai-Uwe Bloem
MicroGnuEmacs v2.0g ported by yours truely

they are both snarfable via FTP from dsrgsun.ces.cwru.edu in
pub/minix. hopefully we will have the real thing, GnuEmacs(v18.55) soon, as it
already runs on an atariSt under Tos (gnuEmacs for tos is also
available on dsrgsun.ces.cwru.edu in files pub/atari/emacs*).
--
--
bang: {any internet host}!dsrgsun.ces.CWRU.edu!bammi jwahar r. bammi
domain: ba...@dsrgsun.ces.CWRU.edu
GEnie: J.Bammi

[Peter da Silva]

In article <76...@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> ben...@VAX1.CC.UAKRON.EDU (Kevin Benton) writes:

> How about posting the MicroEmacs diffs that you used and a version number
> so many of us can enjoy the many benifits of the far superior macros of

> Micro-Emacs...

It'd just disappoint you, I'm afraid. I doubt if Microemacs for AmigaOS
would be very useful under Minix.

If and when I get Elvis working under AmigaOS I'll post those diffs. To
comp.sources.amiga, of course.

[Peter da Silva]

[please followup to comp.sys.intel or comp.os.minix only: news doesn't
support context-sensitive followups :->]

In article <1990Jan23.1...@virtech.uucp> den...@virtech.uucp (Dennis P. Bednar) writes:
> Could you be more specific about the vi features in elvis but not
> in stevie?

Disclaimer: I haven't looked at Stevie in some time.

Stevie doesn't seem to support much of the "ex" mode of "vi". Elvis, so
far as I have been able to tell, supports the entire set of commands in
"ed" and maybe even "ex". The regular expression code is deficient, for
example:

s/Make\([^ ]*\) /Make[\1] /p

results in:

RE error: internal urp

(this under Intel System V/386). Otherwise I can find no technical
fault with it. The aesthetic problems of screen redraw and the use of
raw mode I/O when in EX mode are relatively minor.

> By the way, I've ported stevie version 3.69 to Intel's
> iRMX-286, and really like it.

I'd really like a copy of this. We use RMX here, and there are a number
of people refusing to switch to VI (or anything but aedit) because it's
not available under RMX. I'm not up to doing *two* ports of Elvis at
once, and since I don't use RMX I'm not going to miss the features.

Anyone with RMX patches for MicroEmacs 3.10?