Darren New wrote:
> My favorite is how emacs brings up the help screen when you hit backspace.
> I'm pretty sure the defined meaning of backspace predates emacs. :-)

No, Ctrl-H opens help. If your terminal sends Ctrl-H on backspace, that's
not Emacs's fault.

http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-opersys.html#s9.8

Post a reply to this message

nemesis wrote:
> scott escreveu:
>> Really, I wish MS would ban software that doesn't at least use the
>> standard font, menus, toolbars, dialogs etc.
> 
> Emacs and vi were around long before Microsoft began selling DOS.  Their
> standards are as valid in their context as Microsoft's in their
> products.  They won't change their way to do their stuff just because
> there's a new kid in town.  More likely they will thin out and die
> before going that route.

gVim for Windows integrates with Windows quite well.

Example: Selection on Vim usually enters 'visual' mode, so eg. if you
press 'y' after selecting something, it will get "yanked" (copied).

On the Windows port, by default, selection enters 'select' mode, so if you
press 'y' after selecting something, it will get deleted and replaced
with 'y'.

Post a reply to this message

nemesis wrote:
> Darren New escreveu:
>> nemesis wrote:
>>> Batch editing with pipes and sed has no place in today's fast-paced 
>>> interactive programming.
>>
>> Heh heh heh.
> 
> Is that a sed programmer laugh? :)

No. That's from someone who just went thru 250+ directories, found all the 
files with the string SDL or sdl in the file name, directory name, or inside 
the files, and duplicated it to another file, directory, or #ifdef section 
within the file, as appropriate.

Do that interactively? I'd still be at it.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> No, Ctrl-H opens help. If your terminal sends Ctrl-H on backspace, that's
> not Emacs's fault.

No, it's just the international standard that has been in place since before 
UNIX was even invented, let alone emacs.

What character sequence do you think the backspace key *should* send?

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> My God... The Windows native port...

http://bash.org/?44287

> ...is a 37 MB download! O_O 
> 
> *dies*
> 
> I thought SciTE was bad for taking almost 2 MB, but 37 MB for a mere
> text editor?

http://qdb.us/29888
http://qdb.us/7109
http://qdb.us/37015
http://qdb.us/47805
http://qdb.us/52563
http://bash.org/?39330

> But of course, a cursory inspection of the online Emacs tutorial quickly
> reveals that Emacs is not, in fact, a text editor. It's a replacement
> operating system. (But one which is none the less only compatible with
> Unix.)

http://qdb.us/37509
http://qdb.us/48521
http://qdb.us/75396

> Not content with merely being a text editor, it also tries to be a
> newsreader, web browser, file manager, calendar, and even a Tetris
> clone. Unfortunately, from the screenshots I've seen, it does none of
> these things very well.

http://qdb.us/24802
http://qdb.us/29834
http://qdb.us/32590
http://qdb.us/60008
http://qdb.us/61838

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 22 Apr 2009 03:33:04 -0300, nemesis wrote:

>> People use the tools they're most comfortable with, and sometimes more
>> than one.
> 
> Sure, feeling comfortable with a beautiful, more familiar face is a nice
> thing to get.  Even if underpowered, like by choosing gedit vs
> vim/emacs. :)

"Underpowered" though is in the eyes of the beholder - and dependent 
heavily on the task.  I don't know about you, but I wouldn't go and get a 
pneumatic hammer to tap an anchor into the wall to hang a spice rack.

> Not all editing tasks would benefit from vim/emacs -- like short, plain
> typing with little editing other than backspace -- but those that do get
> a serious boost from a proper tool.

Sure.

>> Hell, at times, I use awk for editing.  If I knew sed better, I'd
>> probably use that, too.
> 
> Like Perl, they're excellent batch text editing tools.

I find Perl to be a bit heavy, honestly.  The extensibility is useful 
(and I do use it for some things, though I'm more comfortable in awk) at 
times, but if I want to do just some basic parsing, Perl seems like 
overkill.

>> People doing change-on-the-fly editing using pipes might say that it's
>> noobs who use crutches like vim or emacs.
> 
> Batch editing with pipes and sed has no place in today's fast-paced
> interactive programming.  

Oh, I don't know about that.  I had to process a couple hundred e-mail 
messages, generate PDFs of the contents, and re-send them to myself.  
Easiest way was to export the messages to a text file and run them 
through a few awk scripts - using pipes.  Fed the results into another 
awk script that mailed the stuff back to me.

sed has it's place in there as well, and probably some of what I did 
could've been done more easily with sed.

>> Remember that we all had to start somewhere, and those of us who've
>> been in the biz for 15 years or more (which I think is you and me both)
>> tend to forget that the landscape has changed in that time.
> 
> I think I've been keeping up with new technological advances just fine.
>   And yet I don't see any text editing tool marvels as those 2, even in
> high end modernese IDEs.

Well, that could well be because you're used to the tools you use. :)

>> Our way may be
>> better for us, but that doesn't necessarily make it better for
>> everyone.
> 
> I don't think so.  The day I can select and copy one long SQL select
> query with a mouse just as easily as y} or go back after a search to the
> exact point I was 700 lines above with Ctrl+o is the day I'll eat my
> underwear. :)

There again, you're framing it in terms of your experience.  I'm talking 
about from someone else's POV.  That's much harder to judge for most 
people because they're not used to standing in someone else's shoes and 
saying that the other POV might have a point.

>> can't move a mouse that fast, so I tend to not even use menus in GNOME
>> (I tend to use ALT+F2 and type the program name in because it's faster
>> for me).
> 
> I control my Linux box from the always open gnome-terminal.  My regular
> programs are always in bash_history, so it's just a matter of Ctrl-R'ing
> for them. :)

Heh, same here.  Except I use tcsh and ! - but same concept.

>>  That doesn't mean that for my stepson - who also types rather
>> quickly at 21 - is a lesser computer user because he uses the mouse
>> more than I do.  He's just got a different workflow for the things he
>> does.
> 
> I think he's losing a lot. ;)

Oh, I don't think so - he's quite adept with the tools he uses, both on 
Windows and on Linux.  Just because he doesn't do things the way you and 
I do doesn't mean he's missing out - he might say the same about us 
because we are "stuck in our old ways of doing things". ;-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

nemesis wrote:
> Invisible escreveu:
>>>> change absolutely anything [with the not inconsiderable detail that you
>>>> don't have to recompile anything]. But only once you've read and
>>>> memorised the entire source tree. How feasible is that, really?
>>>
>>>     Eh? No! You don't have to dig into source code for Emacs to
>>>     customize
>>> it. It comes with a Lisp interpreter for a reason!
>> 
>> You do if you want to make it do something there isn't a setting for.
> 
> Like a new garbage collector?  Pretty much only the core elisp
> interpreter and basic IO routines are in C, the rest of emacs is elisp.

And that elisp code isn't "source code of emacs"?

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
>>> Does anybody know what the hell "C-u 10 C-f" is actually supposed to
>>> mean? What the heck is a "meta key"? Why are cut and past called kill
>>> and yank? The list of questions goes on and on.
>> 
>> which does which? Kill I imagine deletes the text. Yank I guess is
>> similar to a copy then delete operation.
> 
> Actually, it appears that kill = cut and yank = paste. (WTF?)

Yank is paste? In vim, yank is copy. Put is paste.

Post a reply to this message

nemesis wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> emacs is a religion.  Notepad isn't.
> 
> Yes, emacs can move mountains. ;)

It has more mass than a mountain, so why not.

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:
> True, but sometimes a bicycle is all you need, you don't need a 747 to
> take you to the corner market. ;-)

A coworker told me he once went to IBM to work for a project, and the other
people there would start Rational Software Architect every time they had to
change a line of a config file *sigh*

Post a reply to this message