El Sab, 7 de Febrero de 2009, 19:40, Harry Putnam escribió: > Jesús Guerrero <i92gu...@terra.es> writes: > > >> El Vie, 6 de Febrero de 2009, 22:00, Harry Putnam escribió: >> >>> Grant Edwards <gra...@visi.com> writes: >>> >>> >>> >>>>> The cynic in me says that it's because Tim Berners-Lee >>>>> invented HTML, not Richard M Stallman. >>>> >>>> Info has been around a lot longer than HTML, but I think you're >>>> largely correct. >>> >> [...] >> >>> I recommend that people use emacs to read `info'. They work really >>> well together and the vast arsenal of search and other tools in emacs >>> are brought to bare in `info' reading. Once you used emacs for `info' >>> reading the standalone `Info' reader will seem pretty primitive. >> >> Well, I'd first need to use info to use emacs to use info, >> you get the point :p > > Ahh no. You'd first need to pay attention to the thread. > > > Then if you want to learn about emacs you might consider using emacs > to learn about emacs rather than info. Emacs is thoroughly documented on > board. > > So wrong on both counts. ; )
Well, you might still get the point of my post: if you are not an emacs user and you don't want to use emacs just to read info pages, you are stuck with plain info, which is just as bad and sometimes even worse than man. Info is nice when you already know what you are looking for. But it's a pain to handle when you need to find something quick. Emacs helps with that, but first a non-emacs user would need help with emacs, which negates all the benefit. That's what I meant. I follow the thread since it started, by the way. > Far as I know... no one but newbies think the manuals are written for > newbies. They are not. But the truth is that newcomers need to use the man pages, like it or not. Be realistic. > Neither is the info system. But it does have considerably more detail > in some manuals and usually a hypertexted index and tables of contents. > That alone (in many cases) renders it more usable. That entirely depends on the concrete man and info pages we are talking about, and how careful and smart its creator was. >> Once you are proficient with emacs, then info vs. man is >> probably a non-issue for you anyway, so I don't get your point there. > > Please... if you paid attention you'd know that the emacs thing was > offered as an advanced method of using info. Note the keyword "advanced". > That already precludes newbies. Already commented on that. > Further, how is that > being proficient in emacs renders man or info a non-issue? Because if you know emacs you can probably find your way around the docs, it doesn't matter if they are man, info, readmes, html or whatever else you might imagine. > > Once more for those who are unwilling to read the thread before > posting. Errm... I'll better not answer to that. > There should be no posts beyond this point proclaiming how tuff it is > to use emacs if you have no network on a fresh install... Or having to > suffer through learning info to learn emacs to.... ah but who knows. So you word is definitive and infallible. -- Jesús Guerrero
