I was making a pun: 'acme' means the highest point.
But I also disagree with you: acme is strictly more powerful than vi, and vim is just a Greenspunned Emacs. Greenspun's Tenth Rule holds that 'any sufficiently complicated C or Fortran program contains an ad hoc, informally-specified, bug-ridden, slow implementation of half of Common Lisp'; I contend that vim is an ad-hoc, informally-specified[0], bad-taste (seriously, have you ever looked at Vimscript?) reimplementation of Emacs's functionality.
It does, however, have better keybindings than Emacs does by default.
0: outside of the POSIX stuff it gets from vi, that is
Emacs is built on Unix like vi and everything else. The fact that vi has a less elegant language doesn't affect me, because I don't see much value in adding extensions to the editor. What I need is a sane user interface, which vim provides.
Re:A Tour of Acme (2012)
by abjKT26nO8 on Thursday July 09, 2020 @04:58PM
(#23785140)
The original Emacs was written for Multics at a time when people outside of Bell Labs were largely unaware of the existence of Unix[1]. It also doesn't follow the Unix philosophy of making small CLI utilities composed with pipes. As I understand it (though I haven't used it), Acme is extended with external programs which communicate through pipes just like the traditional Unix utilities.
No way, acme is just ONE direction for Unix and C. Vi is another direction, as well as a ton of other editors that were made for Unix and C.