|
 |
Well, don't use it then :) That's the beautify of Linux, is in it's
ability to let one use what they want to use - it's VERY configurable,
and I sincerely believe that is an asset. This conversation will quickly
go nowhere, just like "which is better vi or emacs" goes nowhere - so I
propose we live and let live. We don't, after all, drive the same cars,
eat the same foods, listen to the same music, etc. It seems the issue is
personal taste more than anything...
Warp wrote:
>TigerHawk <tig### [at] stic net> wrote:
>
>>Dude chill out, the world doesn't revolve around Emacs...
>>
>
> But why make something that is already done (and better)?
>
>>For example, while taking notes for CS I
>>prefer to use jed because it's smaller
>>
>
> Who cares? In modern computers the size of emacs is nothing.
>
>>faster
>>
>
> Faster in what way?
> If I press a key, the correspondent letter appears immediately on the
>window. That's fast enough.
>
> I don't consider speed to be a reason to switch to another editor which
>has a lot less features.
>
>>and does many of the same things I need it to do.
>>
>
> That's the point: It does "many", not "all".
> I personally am not prepared to change editor to a "smaller" and "faster"
>one if it means I will be losing features I use.
>
>>Let's
>>face it, Emacs is a dusty old dinosaur
>>
>
> Why all programs which have existed for long time are "old dinosaurs"?
> The current version of emacs is pretty different from the first emacs
>which existed. I wouldn't call it "old".
>
--
/~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\
| Tim Soderstrom |
| Mig### [at] mailutexasedu |
| http://www.crosswinds.net/~mightytim |
| |
| "Life is like a box of chocolates - never know what you gonna get" |
| -Forrest Gump |
\ /
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'us-ascii' (4 KB)
|
|
