Dorai Sitaram <ds26@goldshoe.gte.com> wrote:
+---------------
| Rob Warnock <rpw3@rigden.engr.sgi.com> wrote:
| >So while "vi" will never be as perfectly tuned to Lisp as Emacs is,
| >for me it's good enough...
| 
| Many Lispers are put off by vi's default indents for Lisp code.
| An option is to use an external !filter...
+---------------

Such as your very own "scmindent", eh?  ;-}  ;-}
<URL:http://www.cs.rice.edu/~dorai/scmindent/scmindent.html>

+---------------
| but that doesn't help in autoindenting.   
+---------------

Yeah, well, I guess autoindenting just isn't very high on my wish-list.
I guess I just don't find indenting consistently to be all that difficult.
[Especially since Vi's ">%" and "<%" commands do a fine job of reindenting
multi-line s-exprs, particularly if you ":set shiftwidth=1" first, and
then use the "." to repeat as needed.]

+---------------
| It's heartening to note there is a non-zero population that doesn't
| consider a preference for vi as an editor and a preference for
| (non-Emacs) Lisps as proglangs to be mutually exclusive!
+---------------

Indeed!

And again, I am *NOT* trying to make any kind of "Emacs *versus* Vi"
statements here! Only saying that *if* (for whatever reason) someone
doesn't feel comfortable using Emacs (as I don't, despite multiple tries),
there are other editors (such as Vi &c) that *might* work "well enough"
for you when doing Lisp programming.


-Rob

-----
Rob Warnock, 31-2-510		rpw3@sgi.com
SGI Network Engineering		<URL:http://reality.sgi.com/rpw3/>
1600 Amphitheatre Pkwy.		Phone: 650-933-1673
Mountain View, CA  94043	PP-ASEL-IA