Date:        Wed, 24 Apr 2002 15:24:40 +0100
    From:        Chris Wareham <chris.wareham@iosystems.co.uk>
    Message-ID:  <3CC6C028.4050607@iosystems.co.uk>

  | I'm not disputing that vim may be rubbish - I've never looked at the
  | source code - but could you qualify in what way it's rubbish?

I perhaps should have just said that it's not vi - certainly not an improved
vi, it is an entirely different editor with a kind of similar command set.
Claiming vim is a version of vi would be like claiming that ex (or vi, which
is just a part of ex) is just a version of ed.   There might be ancestral ties,
but that's as close as it comes (and in the case of vim, it appears to be
moving further and further away - one version I saw didn't even have the Q
command to revert to line mode commands).

I didn't mean to imply that it wasn't a safe editor to use - if you don't
care whether it is vi or not, by all means use it (it has to be better than
emacs...)

kre