Subject: Re: Choice LISP editor
From: (Rob Warnock)
Date: 1 Jun 2001 02:45:13 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Message-ID: <9f6vjp$cqlqu$>
Dorai Sitaram <> wrote:
| Rob Warnock <> wrote:
| >So while "vi" will never be as perfectly tuned to Lisp as Emacs is,
| >for me it's good enough...
| Many Lispers are put off by vi's default indents for Lisp code.
| An option is to use an external !filter...

Such as your very own "scmindent", eh?  ;-}  ;-}

| but that doesn't help in autoindenting.   

Yeah, well, I guess autoindenting just isn't very high on my wish-list.
I guess I just don't find indenting consistently to be all that difficult.
[Especially since Vi's ">%" and "<%" commands do a fine job of reindenting
multi-line s-exprs, particularly if you ":set shiftwidth=1" first, and
then use the "." to repeat as needed.]

| It's heartening to note there is a non-zero population that doesn't
| consider a preference for vi as an editor and a preference for
| (non-Emacs) Lisps as proglangs to be mutually exclusive!


And again, I am *NOT* trying to make any kind of "Emacs *versus* Vi"
statements here! Only saying that *if* (for whatever reason) someone
doesn't feel comfortable using Emacs (as I don't, despite multiple tries),
there are other editors (such as Vi &c) that *might* work "well enough"
for you when doing Lisp programming.


Rob Warnock, 31-2-510
SGI Network Engineering		<URL:>
1600 Amphitheatre Pkwy.		Phone: 650-933-1673
Mountain View, CA  94043	PP-ASEL-IA