On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 04:34:57PM +0200, John Crisp wrote:
> On 15/07/15 15:48, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 08:10:15PM +0630, Ста Деюс wrote:
> >> Good time of the day, Franco.
>
> >>
> >> I suggest instead of nano/vim -- mcedit -- the internal text editor,
> >> coming w/ MC. -- I think that MC is a must for any distro -- for it is
> >> comfortable to manage files/dir.s w/ it. If so, why no to use the
> >> already installed editor -- moreover that it is more comfortable to
> >> work w/ -- in my opinion. I think a lot of people had experience ever
> >> w/ the DOS programs and its NC, VC, etc.
>
> Gets my vote - lost without mc and the first thing I always install
>
> >
> > My entire problem with mc is that it's too easy to type mc when I mean
> > mv and instead of moving my file it gets me into a strange mode I have
> > to figure out how to get out of.
> >
>
> I don't believe mc is any more rocket science than vim. Just what you
> are used too.
>
> I just tried vim to see what happened. Friendly help screen and amongst
> other things :
>
> Type :help
> Type :q
>
> Is that type: 'q' or type ':q' (for the novice)
>
> If I so much as touch a letter I can see text on the screen but then
> couldn't figure out how the hell to quit because the help screen
> disappears, :q doesn't quit, then the help which helpfully disappeared
> doesn't come to your rescue with :help and I am then locked in a padded
> cell :-)

That's exactly the problem with vi. I have been using Linux for well
over a decade now, and usually edit with emacs. The only time I have
to use vi is when my system isn't set up properly yet and some system
activity decides I have to edit something and pitched me into vi. I am
then lost. The changes I have to make in such circumstances are
usually small enough that nano suffices nicely. And when I'm done with
those changes it' easy to exit. Is says how right on the bottom of
the screen.

Even experienced Linux users, who normally use the command
line on a text console, may not know vi. It's the experienced vi users
that know how to use vi. It's not the same population.

And it's the experienced emacs users that know how to use emacs. It's
also not the same population.

Let's not try to adjudicate the vi vs emacs battle and force either of
them on the user of a newly installed system.
.
For the default editor, the one that's installed at the beginning,
the one that's identified by $EDITOR, the one that's picked by an
arbitrary systemd process when it's time to edit some random text file,
neither vi not emacs is acceptable. nano works in this context,
because it's so seriously self-explanatory.

And no, I wouldn't want nano for everyday editing either. It's usable
in a pinch, but it can easily be a pain for everyday use. But it's the
editor that everyone can figure out how to use in short order to make
simple changes.

Perhaps the first thing you'd do after installation is to choose a
better editor and point $EDITOR to it. But you then you, ther user,
*gets to choose the editor*. Forcing those unfamiliar with it to use
vi or to use emacs is to make life difficult for a significant part of
out potential user base. Doing either of these makes the first-day
installation and setup learning curve significantly steeper than
necessary.

If there were some other editor whose use was as self-evident as nano,
it could also be a good candidate.

-- hendrik

>

> Only took me a few minutes before I vaguely remembered to try and use
> ESC :q    Ah - get the cursor at the bottom. Wish they had mentioned
> that earlier......

>
> Made me realise why I use mc/mcedit and gave up on vim - too cryptic for
> me. Admittedly mc could do with a 'Use F keys' on the front page but
> beyond that for most stuff.....
>
> Clearly YMMV :-)
>
> B. Rgds
> John
>



> _______________________________________________
> Dng mailing list
> Dng@???
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng