On Sun, Jul 20, 2025 at 9:52 AM Will Senn <will.senn(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I remember having discussions about vi vs emacs in the
mid 1990's. I'm
curious if those were the first public wars about editors, or if y'all
remember earlier flamewars on the subject? Maybe KEDIT vs EDIT?
Hmm I don't think it was really a new thing, as I think the UNIX and VMS
editor wars occurred long after earlier conflicts. Hey, even UNIX had way
more than just ex/vi and emacs. There was the Rand Editor and Fred, to
name two others, who were popular in the early PDP-11 UNIX days. Also,
remember that for the early DEC PDPs 1/6/10 machines, there were Stopgap,
SonOfStopgap (*a.k.a.* SOS - which became DEC's EDIT), Teco, and
eventually EMACS [remember UNIX emacs is a clone of the original
TOPS-10/ITS EMACS]; and probably others that I am forgetting - those the
ones I used in PDP-10 days. In fact, I learned Emacs on the PDP-10, but
neither Gosling nor Zimmerman had yet written their C versions. I used
Fred as my first video editor on UNIX and did not learn ex(1) until a few
years later, when I was at Tektronix, as it was not available on the CMU
systems. By the time EMACS arrived (and required a 32-bit system), I was
fluent with it and never bothered to go back.
I'll also note that the PDP-8 and PDP-11 families had their own set of
editors, and that was just in the DEC world. The IBM world was really not
any different. Any interactive system needs an editor. In all cases, the
line editors were first because that was what you could use with a Teletype
Model 28 and later Model 33 ASR or a Friden (Singer/Link) Flexowriter.
With the advent of the "glass tty," the editor wars took on new life as
several editors emerged on different systems.. As I said, UNIX had a
number before ex/vi. The Rand Editor was the most widely used in the UNIX
world early on. [ I don't remember why we used Cornell's Fred over the
Rand Editor at CMU in those days, but I know we had both].
To make matters worse, until UNIX came along, the concept of file types and
"access methods" was fairly well ingrained in those systems. So features
like embedded line numbers (or not) would get into the war. The DEC PDP
1/6/10 Stopgap family added line numbers that compilers and other tools
were aware of. IBM ISAM files did the same thing, which is how we
sometimes prepared our source code TSS, as you could create card images
from ISAM file easily. At the time, I remember there were arguments about
needing line numbers or not. A dirty secret about me, I turn on line
numbers in vi, because I often find it faster to refer to things that way.
That is probably because I learned the TSS editor first on the IBM 360 and
then used SOS on TOPS, all before I started using Unix. So when I did, I
learned to use ed(1) with its dynamic line numbering and never stopped,
even when vi mode showed up in ex(1).
Clem