Re: OT editors

From: mAsterdam <mAsterdam_at_vrijdag.org>
Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2007 05:22:28 +0100
Message-ID: <475a1adf$0$245$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>

paul c schreef:
> mAsterdam wrote:

>> As someone who experienced (mainframe) editors like Xedit (Mansfield 
>> keeps a PC version (Kedit) alive, but who knows how long it will be 
>> supported) I cannot get used to the clumsiness of vi.

>
> Well, the vi people I knew might have said the same about xedit as Dirty
> Harry when he was assigned to the HR department, something the same as
> what I hear in my mind's eye every day when local traffic news mentions
> accident on 88th st., the way they pronounce it, it comes out as ayjut
> street. Might be right from what I've seen of that suburg. Anything
> good that IBM did in those days was supressed by IBM, CMS, Rexx et
> cetera because stuff that stood on its own wasn't in IBM's
> self-interest. However, when the dominant hardware and environment
> changes, there's no good reason to perpetuate xedit, nor vi, they are
> both very environment-specific, or as you might put it, not
> environment-neutral, which term, strangely, seems to be pertinent here.

It seems we do agree on practical issues :-)

> You still haven't explained how a relation can have two headers. Do you
> think it can or not? I have the impression that you are dodging the
> question by picking holes or otherwise darting around in the ether.

Please re-read my post (where my contribution started with Consider the statement "Jon is 33 years old") and our subsequent side-issue discussion very carefully. It is you who intoduced the RM, it is you who introduced something which I could /not/ give a place in the RM, labelling it "multiple headings to one relation".

If you, after re-reading, still are of the opinion that I am dodging a question - please restate it clearly in your response. Received on Fri Dec 07 2007 - 22:22:28 CST