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