Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!rutgers!ucsd!ucbvax!hplabs!pyramid!athertn!ericb
From: ericb@athertn.Atherton.COM (Eric Black)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Grow your own VI (Re: AVI editor)
Message-ID: <216@mango.athertn.Atherton.COM>
Date: 15 Aug 88 15:45:35 GMT
References: <2424@sugar.uu.net> <2030100@hpcilzb.HP.COM> <8233@watdragon.waterloo.edu>
Reply-To: ericb@mango.UUCP (Eric Black)
Organization: Atherton Technology, Sunnyvale, CA
Lines: 25

In article <8233@watdragon.waterloo.edu> mwjones@lion.waterloo.edu (Morgan Jones) writes:
>In article <2030100@hpcilzb.HP.COM> daves@hpcilzb.HP.COM (Dave Scroggins) writes:
>>I always thought the progression went ED -> EX -> VI.
>
>EX and VI are the same editor.  Ed may be as well.  They're just different
>links to the same file.
>

Nowadays EX and VI are combined into the same executable file, and are
just invoked by different names.  Once in either, you can switch to
the other.

However, they really are two different editor programs which were combined
into one executable.  They share some code, but not as much as you think.

Dave is right about the historical progression.  However, VI did not
spring forth from EX as we know it today.  What we see as VI and EX
are both descendents of a common ancestor version of EX, which was
itself an overgrown hacked-up ED.

-- 
Eric Black	"Garbage in, Gospel out"
Atherton Technology, 1333 Bordeaux Dr., Sunnyvale, CA, 94089
   UUCP:	{sun,decwrl,hpda,pyramid}!athertn!ericb
   Domainist:	ericb@Atherton.COM