Re: [vile] mini-buffer question

[Thomas Dickey]

----- Original Message -----
| From: "Thomas Dickey" <address@hidden>
| To: address@hidden
| Cc: "Vile List" <address@hidden>
| Sent: Friday, March 13, 2015 7:55:20 AM
| Subject: Re: [vile] mini-buffer question
| 
| ----- Original Message -----
| | From: "Gary Jennejohn" <address@hidden>
| | To: "Thomas Dickey" <address@hidden>
| | Cc: "j. van den hoff" <address@hidden>, "Vile List"
| | <address@hidden>
| | Sent: Friday, March 13, 2015 6:54:57 AM
| | Subject: Re: [vile] mini-buffer question
| | 
| | On Fri, 13 Mar 2015 06:16:50 -0400 (EDT)
| | Thomas Dickey <address@hidden> wrote:
| | 
| | > ----- Original Message -----
| | > | From: "j. van den hoff" <address@hidden>
| | > | To: "Vile List" <address@hidden>, "Paul Fox"
| | > | <address@hidden>
| | > | Sent: Friday, March 13, 2015 5:50:20 AM
| | > | Subject: Re: [vile] mini-buffer question
| | > | 
| | > | On Fri, 13 Mar 2015 01:11:07 +0100, Paul Fox
| | > | <address@hidden>
| | > | wrote:
| | > | 
| | > | > wayne wrote:
| | > | >  > On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 01:56:44PM -0400, Wayne Cuddy
| | > | >  > wrote:
| | > | >  > > I would certainly prefer having to hit ^V prior to
| | > | >  > > inserting
| | > | > "special"
| | > | >  > > characters, but I'm the only one who uses vile. Not only
| | > | >  > > is
| | > | >  > > that the
| | > | >  > > traditional vi behavior but most shells default to that
| | > | >  > > as
| | > | >  > > well. Of
| | > | >  > > course it can be worked around but in my old age my
| | > | >  > > muscle
| | > | >  > > memory
| | > | > takes
| | > | >  > > precedence over my mental memory :)
| | > | >  >
| | > | >  > HA HA that should have read "not the only one who uses
| | > | >  > vile".
| | > | >  > That one
| | > | >  > gave me a laugh.
| | > | >
| | > | > my thought was, "well, i think there are at least 3 of us..."
| | > | >  :-)
| | > | 
| | > | still a too pessimistic assessment ;-)
| | > | 
| | > | joerg
| | > 
| | > I have an impression that actual users are a lot more than those
| | > on
| | > the
| | > mailing list - perhaps several hundred to low thousands
| | > worldwide.
| | > That's not really a large number, but it's not negligible.
| | > 
| | 
| | Do you have any statistics for the number of Windows downloads?
| | How about source?
| 
| There are logs, but the site (I use an ISP package...) doesn't do
| analysis on the ftp downloads.
| I recall that my website gets ~6000 page hits a day, and
| xterm+ncurses account for 80-90% of that,
| with lynx and vile accounting about about 2/3 of the remainder.
| 
| | I always install WinVile when I'm forced to use Windows.  And
| | I always install at least xvile under FreeBSD.  Unfortunately,
| | since I gave up maintaining the vile/xvile ports it's no longer
| | possible to have both installed at the same time :(
| | 
| | Of course, now adays many FreeBSD users install using pkg(7),
| | so you wouldn't have any statistics for that.
| | 
| 
| right.  Debian has popcon (I don't supply figures for that, because
| I install lots of packages for no other reason than to research
| bugs).
| It says 193 installs of vile here -
| http://popcon.debian.org/source/by_inst,
| versus (the other programs I work on):
| 
| 1093292 ncurses,
| 105126 xterm,
| 45949 lynx-cur,
| 26533 diffstat,
| 23563 dialog,
| 3464 libcdk5
| 1756 byacc,
| 369 bcpp,
| 105 cproto,
| 92 vttest,
| 51 tapecalc (add)
| 
| Considering that I work actively on vile (more than lynx),
| but not on for several years on bcpp (and not much on cdk),
| I would say that vile is under-appreciated.
| 
| On the other hand, I wouldn't regard figures from a popularity
| contest as usable...

for instance

http://joeyh.name/blog/entry/the_popcon_problem/
http://www.linuxjournal.com/content/popcon-are-you-or-out

-- 
Thomas E. Dickey <address@hidden>
http://invisible-island.net
ftp://invisible-island.net