18 Jul
2025
18 Jul
'25
3:29 a.m.
On Jul 17, 2025, at 7:52 PM, segaloco via TUHS <tuhs(a)tuhs.org> wrote:
Going via screen(1) can be more painful. If you want to copy some lines
from one file to another, you have to either create a temp file or
use the window systems's cut/paste buffer/clipboard. The latter can
actually works worse (if you have autoindent turned on for example).
Also the modal nature of vi/vim can wreak havoc (copied text can be
mistakenly interpreted as commands).
In vi you can yank lines in file1, paste in file2. And can share
options, tags etc. In the rand editor you can scroll two windows in
unison (handy if one shows column headings and the other some rows).
See acme for an example of a well designed multi window editor.
If you just do ":E" it will put both
windows on the current file,
exactly the same as vim. But both do it wrong (IMHO) as the second
window starts at the same place (e.g top of the file). In the Rand
Editor if the split is at line N, the bottom window shows lines N+1.
Exact same behavior for vertical split (the left and right side
windows show the same portions as before).
> On Jul 17, 2025, at 6:09 PM, Larry McVoy lm(a)mcvoy.com wrote:
>
> Not really the same. :sp splits your window in half and puts you in
> two different windows on the same file. Each window, in vim, is full
> on vi, you can do :e fillename and now that window is on that file.
Not historic but as of present I shunt windowing off to GNU screen and just have separate
nvi sessions in each. This may speak to ignorance on my part regarding advantages of
opening multiple files in the same session in any given vi. I keep vim around for when I
need the value adds, but nvi is linked as ex/vi/view. I suppose it is nice to keep your
window configuration tightly coupled, but I also frequently have vi in one pane and am
using the others for od output and build/test cycle for disassembly projects.