 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka <ano### [at] anonymous org> wrote:
> Darren New schrieb:
> > Yet everything I've heard, people like it much better after actually
> > using it for a day.
>
> It's a PITA though if your main job involves only occasional use of
> Office, and you have the old stuff at home... That sucks.
>
> >> That's why I prefer vi and emacs: solid, well-grounded 30+ years
> >> interface
> >> design... ;)
>
> Yuck^2 !
>
> You can only learn to love *that* interface if you're locked up in a
> room with no more than a Linux computer locked down in such a way that
> the only way of interacting with the outside world is via the vi
> interface - for a *month* at least!
It was an obvious joke. :)
In any case, I learned vi(m) about 4 years ago and decided to drop emacs
altogether. It's an incredibly full-featured and easy editor once you get past
the initial fear. Specially when combined with ctags.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
> Specially when combined with ctags.
I could really use a ctags that works with C++ these days. :-(
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> nemesis wrote:
> > Specially when combined with ctags.
>
> I could really use a ctags that works with C++ these days. :-(
http://ctags.sourceforge.net
never heard of it until seeing it recommended in the vim manual... truthfully
highly recommended! :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> nemesis wrote:
>>> Specially when combined with ctags.
>> I could really use a ctags that works with C++ these days. :-(
>
> http://ctags.sourceforge.net
>
> never heard of it until seeing it recommended in the vim manual... truthfully
> highly recommended! :)
I'm pretty sure that's the version I'm using, and it works really
craptasticly for the source files I'm working with. It might just be that
the source files are so f'ed in organization.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
>
> In any case, just so you know, vi vs emacs arguments are a classic
> flamefest.
>
Yes they are. I was talking about Vi vs Notepad/Metapad/etc ;).
-Aero
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
>
> I just fired it up, hit F1, and typed "security level for running macros".
With O2k I learned that VBA help is actually pretty good, but while I
could find pretty much anything available easily on E2k and E2k3, I
hadn't yet needed the help on Excel itself. Maybe I should check it on
2007 ;).
> I got an entire tutorial on it, including how to sign code and links to
> things like "how to turn off security warnings permanently" on other pages.
I want the middle option (ask for macros, which are done signed by known
person).
> I'm guessing you're missing the developer tab, which you have to
> explicitly turn on according to the docs.
Might be, I'll need to check that.
There was also some other option I tried to look for, but I can't
remember what it was (I guess I solved that problem quickly by using 2003).
-Aero
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 16:06:28 -0700, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>and it works really craptasticly
LOL, I like it :)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> nemesis wrote:
> > Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> >> nemesis wrote:
> >>> Specially when combined with ctags.
> >> I could really use a ctags that works with C++ these days. :-(
> >
> > http://ctags.sourceforge.net
> >
> > never heard of it until seeing it recommended in the vim manual... truthfully
> > highly recommended! :)
>
> I'm pretty sure that's the version I'm using, and it works really
> craptasticly for the source files I'm working with. It might just be that
> the source files are so f'ed in organization.
By default ctags don't generate tags for function prototypes (go figure). Do
like this to get away with this dumb limitation:
ctags -R --C++-kinds=+p
to view all such options:
ctags -R --list-kinds=C++
hope that helps...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Damn that Linux with its 3% market share...
>
>
http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2009/09/microsoft-teaches-best-buy-employees-how-to-troll-linux-users.ars
>
Do they /really/ feel that threatened by Linux?
Granted, I use and like Windows... But, this presentation borders on
absurd...
--
~Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mike Raiford wrote:
> Do they /really/ feel that threatened by Linux?
>
> Granted, I use and like Windows... But, this presentation borders on
> absurd...
Does it?
I mean, think about this. How often do you watch TV and see adverts spit
out completely unsubstantiated claims like "the UK's number one haircare
product" or "significantly outperforms competing brands"? Most people
don't pay the slightest bit of attention to this shallow marketing drivel.
Granted, most TV advertisers don't teach Best Buy to scare customers off
of competing brands... that *is* a little bit suspect. But how many
Renault dealerships will tell you that BWM cars are unreliable?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
