On: Poll: Which is your primary text editor?

[robertnn]

Vi != Vim

[coldtea → robertnn]

Yes, only nobody cares about and nobody uses vi anymore.

Even the "vi" mode in a lot of distros is vim with a compatibility flag. And people only use it in an unknown system to edit some admin files in a hurry.

Vi in 2013 == Vim.

[LeonidasXIV → coldtea]

Vi in 2003 == Vim.

[bifrost → robertnn]

Yeah, I see people get lost going VIM -> NVI all the time. Kinda wish NVI had some of the vim macro/etc functionality in it.

[elmindreda → bifrost]

vi != nvi != Vim

Try using heirloom vi or Solaris vi sometime. Even nvi adds a lot of convenience.

[bifrost → elmindreda]

No doubt, I have definately gone there, its a lil more of a PITA :)

[adamors]

Most of the features Vim is used for don't exist in vi. Vi doesn't have visual mode, syntax highlighting, multiple level undo etc.

Also, Vim is 20+ years old as well.

Edit: grammar

[peatfreak]

The irony of calling somebody out on a false statement with a false statement of your own...

Vim is more or less a superset of vi. Even still, there are some subtle behaviors in real vi that do not work the same in Vim, even in Vim's "compatible" mode.

Of all the vi-like editors, Nvi is much closer to real vi than Vim is.

[theon144]

What? That's not true at all, though I don't know about the "more advanced" functions, since I quit vi and start using vim as soon as I can - because even things like insert mode completely differ.

[dolcaer]

I can see how technically, you can consider them the same. But anyone who's used to vim will have quite a bad time in vi because of all the things that don't work.

[desipenguin]

"Most of vim is from vi" doesn't mean it is same. For Vi != Vim to be wrong (or Vi == Vim to be true) everything that Vim provides MUST work with vi as well - only then they are same/equal.