Re: [dev] Re: a little bit of vi+zsh magic

On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 11:15:11AM +0100, markus schnalke wrote:
>[2009-11-05 04:18] Kris Maglione <maglione.k_AT_gmail.com>
>> On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 09:13:56AM +0000, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
>> >
>> >Yes it's a shame. I think a suckless editor would simply be some kind
>> >of a viewer that integrates the real ed. In a sense vi done right.
>>
>> It's called Sam.
>
>The problem with sam is that it depends on a graphical display. If
>there is none available it's just like ed (with some extensions).
>
>As ed lives everywhere, while sam does not, I rather user ed.

Sam has a documented protocol. It doesn't rely on a graphical
display at all (although it does work rather nicely with a
remote sam and a local graphical samterm). A curses client could
easily be written. It still wouldn't be as efficient over the
network as the graphical client, though.

The main benefit of sam over ed is structural regexps, and
filewise rather than linewise regexps. ed can be a pain in the
ass in that regard at times. Even if sam doesn't live
everywhere, I prefer it where it's available.

-- 
Kris Maglione
Plenty of kind, decent, caring people have no religious beliefs, and
they act out of the goodness of their hearts.  Conversely, plenty of
people who profess to be religious, even those who worship regularly,
show no particular interest in the world beyond themselves.
	--John Danforth, priest, ambassador, senator (b. 1936)