On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 06:06:49PM -0700, cgd@broadcom.com wrote:
> At Wed, 10 Jul 2002 17:14:30 +0000 (UTC), "gabriel rosenkoetter" wrote:
> > Imho, adding features to vi(1) is not appropriate. If you want a
> > more featureful vi-like editor, use pkgsrc/editors/vim. As it
> > stands, nvi is a (nearly) bug-for-bug copy of real (encumbered)
> > vi(1).
> 
> nvi has _lots_ of features over and above traditional vi.  (tildeop is
> the one that i use the most...)

nvi behaves the same way ALMOST all the time, I've spotted a few
differences - generally the nvi behaviour is better.
OTOH I sort of prefer the undo-redo - used to see what you've just
changed.
> 
> IMO, it's quite alright to add features... just don't enable them by
> default and make sure they don't conflict with existing
> behaviour/options.

Absolutely - my 'matchchras' for % is adding an option so that the
traditional; behaviour will work.
> 
> But anyway, yes, this should probably be run by the folks maintaining
> nvi...

Yes - but a netbsd bug isn't a bad placeholder for the information.
I compared thenetbsd 'nvi' source with the 1.79 that can be downloaded
- there are quite a few changes, many because netbsd is much more
particular about fixing compiler warning.
However there are a few bug fixes lurking.

	David

-- 
David Laight: david@l8s.co.uk