Re: emacs or xemacs ?
> From: Brad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ... > On Sat, 25 Sep 1999, Daniel Barclay wrote: .. > > Bringing the Control key back from exile is much cheaper and > > more productive (than reaching unnaturally and having to see > > a doctor). > > i've never had trouble with my control key being in exile... Then again, i > never learned to touch type either (: Maybe the question is whether you use version control and do it with one hand. (I'm thinking of the ^Q in ^X-^Q.) Daniel
Re: emacs or xemacs ?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- On Sat, 25 Sep 1999, Daniel Barclay wrote: > > From: "Richard E. Hawkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > . . . also, using emacs > > on CCIE (*Control Key In Exile) keyboard, causing enough long reaches > > on my little finger sthat I had to see a quack, is probably part (put a > > minor part) of my avoiding either. > > Bringing the Control key back from exile is much cheaper and > more productive (than reaching unnaturally and having to see > a doctor). i've never had trouble with my control key being in exile... Then again, i never learned to touch type either (: - -- finger for PGP public key. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 2.6.3ia Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBN+14Fr7M/9WKZLW5AQHCZwP+MkDVmSRDfubQqStId1hBxtjHCVWZMrUu 4ruWqWFBBJYFZMxAK8Cb6YGhyo8OtBKwvIvpdJuyS9NL7NlJrfeyHj662O97Xf4S oRXmjrG56YdfCaCTESc1oermZI3e5gs5Iw4/DioRLbEe64VPrz/z0/I/MEoO4DXb sEUnc/aRhO0= =Mb6R -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: emacs or xemacs ?
> From: "Richard E. Hawkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > . . . also, using emacs > on CCIE (*Control Key In Exile) keyboard, causing enough long reaches > on my little finger sthat I had to see a quack, is probably part (put a > minor part) of my avoiding either. Bringing the Control key back from exile is much cheaper and more productive (than reaching unnaturally and having to see a doctor). It can even be done on MS Windows! Daniel
Re: emacs or xemacs ?
On Wed, 15 Sep 1999, Rob Mahurin wrote: > On Tue, Sep 14, 1999 at 07:32:22PM -0400, Kristopher Johnson wrote: > > I honestly don't mean to start a holy war here, but I'd like to > > know: Is there anyone who prefers Emacs to XEmacs, and why? > > I use emacs when I'm in a text terminal (like right now) because I > haven't figured out how to use Xemacs' menus from the text terminal > and some of the functions of Xemacs (e.g., syntax highlighting) seem > inaccessible without mouse access to the proper menus. I started to use xemacs for my latex work because emacs and auctex (at least on slink) has some sort of bug which causes the ``quotation'' marks not to work correctly as soon as you work on a file which already exists. On a tty screen I still use emacs20 because xemacs's behaviour involving the backspace and delete keys is giving me problems in that environment. I would prefer to use emacs all the time if it was not for the auctex problem I am experiencing. Johann -- | Johann Spies Windsorlaan 19 | | [EMAIL PROTECTED]3201 Pietermaritzburg | | Tel/Faks Nr. +27 331-46-1310 Suid-Afrika (South Africa) | -- "Honor the LORD with thy substance, and with the firstfruits of all thine increase; So shall thy barns be filled with plenty, and thy presses shall burst out with new wine." Proverbs 3:9,10
Re: emacs or xemacs ?
Jan Vroonhof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Even if "selfish"ness were a proper descriptions of motivations of > previous XEmacs maintainers (which it isn't) Perhaps that is too strong; I suspect the original problem was simply laziness. But it still pulled a major wedgy on the emacs community. > then may I remark that almost all of the people who work on XEmacs in > some major way have copyright assignments on file at the FSF and > people who contribute to XEmacs are all encouraged to do so (although > it is not a requirement). No doubt the current maintainers are all-around great guys, but bad tastes tend to linger, no matter how spotless the current reality. Cheers, -Miles -- Love is a snowmobile racing across the tundra. Suddenly it flips over, pinning you underneath. At night the ice weasels come. --Nietzsche
Re: emacs or xemacs ?
Miles Bader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I honestly don't mean to start a holy war here, but I'd like to > > know: Is there anyone who prefers Emacs to XEmacs, and why? I am trying to stay out of this thread (because discussions like this always become holy wars) but I couldn't let this one pass. > The Xemacs' group rather selfish position on source-code assignments > (so that the FSF can use their changes) also makes me reluctant to > support them in any way. Even if "selfish"ness were a proper descriptions of motivations of previous XEmacs maintainers (which it isn't) then may I remark that almost all of the people who work on XEmacs in some major way have copyright assignments on file at the FSF and people who contribute to XEmacs are all encouraged to do so (although it is not a requirement). Jan (@xemacs.org).
Re: emacs or xemacs ?
On Tue, Sep 14, 1999 at 07:32:22PM -0400, Kristopher Johnson wrote: > Jakob 'sparky' Kaivo wrote: > > > > On Tue, 14 Sep 1999, Juli-Manel Merino Vidal wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > where can I found a document describing the differences between emacs > > > and xemacs ? > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > Check the XEmacs web page: http://www.xemacs.org/ > > > > You might also look at the Emacs web pages: Official: > > http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/emacs.html Unofficial: > > http://www.emacs.org/ > > I honestly don't mean to start a holy war here, but I'd like to know: Is > there anyone who prefers Emacs to XEmacs, and why? > > - Kris > > > -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < > /dev/null > > I prefer XEmacs to Emacs because of several features. I find configuring it is easier, since it has most of the customization options available under a menu. Also, it seems like the program is more oriented towards use under X, taking advantage of the mouse and separate windows for opening files and such. Most importantly, however, is the context-sensitive menus available with XEmacs. For doing SGML editing it's a godsend, being able to right-click anywhere and instantly get a menu of the legal tags available at the point. I also find it helpful for HTML, and somewhat with programming. However I still use Vim for my mail and small file editing, XEmacs is too large to use for every single editing task. Just my $0.02, MBG -- "Infinite: Bigger than the biggest thing ever and then some. Much bigger than that in fact, really amazingly immense, a totally stunning size, real "wow, that's big," time. Infinity is just so big that, by comparison, bigness itself looks really titchy. Gigantic multiplied by colossal multiplied by staggeringly huge is the sort of concept we're trying to get across here." -Douglas Adams 'The Restaurant at the End of the Universe' pgpxUMYOjqNHW.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: emacs or xemacs ?
Kristopher Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I honestly don't mean to start a holy war here, but I'd like to > know: Is there anyone who prefers Emacs to XEmacs, and why? I prefer Emacs To Xemacs. I can't really give a specific reason; my early experience with Lucid Emacs (from whence Xemacs comes) left a bad taste in my mouth. I got the impression that the developers were rather too eager to implement whizzy new features without really thinking all that carefully about the elegance of the result (the `Netscape' school of programming). The Xemacs' group rather selfish position on source-code assignments (so that the FSF can use their changes) also makes me reluctant to support them in any way. Of course, I'd like to have pictures in my w3 buffers, but ... not that much! -Miles -- Love is a snowmobile racing across the tundra. Suddenly it flips over, pinning you underneath. At night the ice weasels come. --Nietzsche
Re: emacs or xemacs ?
On Thu, Sep 16, 1999 at 11:32:42AM +1000, Brian May wrote: > - has built in news reader and mailer. Currently I am experimenting > with Gnus. I have mixed feelings about it. Sometime I may try > Mews. Gnus and it's adaptive scoring are about the only thing that makes most Usenet readable for me. Every time I'm tempted to save some disk space and use vi (well, vim) exclusively it is Gnus that convinces me to keep (X)Emacs around. > - hard to remember exact key stroke, unless you use it frequently. > For instance, to change to another buffer, is it C-x C-b or C-x b? > I always try the wrong one first (buffer listing). Other times, > I am way off, eg to find a parent article in gnus, I type R A > instead of A R. R is the command for reply... I often find myself falling back on "M-x function-name" and apropos when I don't know what I'm doing. The exception is Gnus, where the menus are pretty comprehensive so I tend to use them. > - I use an Ultrix DECstation a lot. The Meta key on Ultrix, is in > about the same position as the Ctrl key on IBM keyboards... To exit, > I frequently am typing M-x M-c instead of C-x C-c. Often when I start > to type the wrong command, it is difficult for me to abort. Sometimes > Ctrl+G works, other times Esc Esc Esc works. Sometimes aborting has > unwanted side-effects, eg closing all windows but the active one. I find > this really annoying. Remap the keyboard on one of them? The wierd effects when aborting sound like bugs, though... > - just how do you use the menus from text mode? IIRC it starts by hitting F10 under Emacs. Don't know about XEmacs. There's a writeup in the manual. > I don't particular care what editor I use, just as long as it > gets the job done efficiently. AOL. -- Mark Brown mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Trying to avoid grumpiness) http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~broonie/ EUFShttp://www.eusa.ed.ac.uk/societies/filmsoc/ pgpaSiXLr8gfx.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: emacs or xemacs ?
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you write: >I still use emacs for some things that I haven't figured out how >to get vim to do. Xemacs has extra buttons on the screen, which take >up screen space. The last line on the terminal in vi takes more >than enough, I don't want to give up even more . . . also, using emacs >on CCIE (*Control Key In Exile) keyboard, causing enough long reaches >on my little finger sthat I had to see a quack, is probably part (put a >minor part) of my avoiding either. Well seeing, as you are comparing vim to emacs here. I have used vim for a long time, and like it because: - it is fast to load. - I can remember the keystrokes - I like to be able to do things like c/"hello which will change all the text up to the next set of quotes with the word hello (it does get messy if you want to replace an entire C string though, and the C string contains nested '"'). I haven't worked out if this is possible with emacs. - no need to learn LISP. - built in support for DOS text mode format. On the downside: - autoindent, especially in text mode, messes up X-Windows paste operations - ie it autoindents. I try to undo with u, but it removes a lot more then I wanted :-(. So I have to undo the undo (redo), and manually delete the problem lines. I haven't yet noticed this problem in emacs, but it might just mean I haven't found it yet. - frequently paste data into a text mode vim editor, when it is in command mode... :-(. - I start typing in text to find it is in command mode, or start typing in commands to find it is in data mode. Yes, I have set up vim so that this is clearly marked, but often I type without thinking. If you look through any draft documents I type, you will see an occasional 'i', where I tried to go into insert mode, but never noticed it already was in insert mode. Recently I have started using emacs and xemacs again. I can't see much difference myself, so I just use xemacs, sometimes with (-nw), sometimes without. The things I like about emacs are: - very customizable. However, with xemacs it is often difficult to know what some of the options on the config menus do (maybe this has changed in xemacs 21, I have never tried it). - has built in support for special features, eg Supercite will automatically handle citations in LaTeX files. - has built in news reader and mailer. Currently I am experimenting with Gnus. I have mixed feelings about it. Sometime I may try Mews. On the downside: - hard to remember exact key stroke, unless you use it frequently. For instance, to change to another buffer, is it C-x C-b or C-x b? I always try the wrong one first (buffer listing). Other times, I am way off, eg to find a parent article in gnus, I type R A instead of A R. R is the command for reply... - I use an Ultrix DECstation a lot. The Meta key on Ultrix, is in about the same position as the Ctrl key on IBM keyboards... To exit, I frequently am typing M-x M-c instead of C-x C-c. Often when I start to type the wrong command, it is difficult for me to abort. Sometimes Ctrl+G works, other times Esc Esc Esc works. Sometimes aborting has unwanted side-effects, eg closing all windows but the active one. I find this really annoying. - no redo command??? - just how do you use the menus from text mode? I don't particular care what editor I use, just as long as it gets the job done efficiently. -- Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: emacs or xemacs ?
Rob Mahurin wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 14, 1999 at 07:32:22PM -0400, Kristopher Johnson wrote: > > I honestly don't mean to start a holy war here, but I'd like to > > know: Is there anyone who prefers Emacs to XEmacs, and why? > > I use emacs when I'm in a text terminal (like right now) because I > haven't figured out how to use Xemacs' menus from the text terminal > and some of the functions of Xemacs (e.g., syntax highlighting) seem > inaccessible without mouse access to the proper menus. In addition, > the cut and paste works differently in Xemacs (in a text terminal) > than in any other text-based program, and it always messes with me. I > am sure that these things are configureable, but I haven't found them > and I don't feel like learning Lisp and reading the source. Actually, that's precisely why I like XEmacs--it has menu options for doing most of the configuration. My biggest complaint about "classic" Emacs was the need to spend hours going through Lisp source code to figure out what magic to add to .emacs (and I actually *like* Lisp). I agree that if you are using a text terminal, then there is no reason to use XEmacs. I should have qualified my original question to say "is there anyone who prefers Emacs to XEmacs on an X terminal?" With the extra nice features of XEmacs, I wonder why anyone would continue to use the ugly-and-hard-to-use version. - Kris
Re: emacs or xemacs ?
> I honestly don't mean to start a holy war here, but I'd like to > know: Is there anyone who prefers Emacs to XEmacs, and why? On my meager Pentium 90, Xemacs takes about 20 seconds to load, and emacs loads in about 3. I prefer emacs. -- Thank you, Joe Bouchard Powered by Debian Linux (Slink)
Re: emacs or xemacs ?
On Wed, Sep 15, 1999 at 02:17:53AM -0400, Rob Mahurin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I use emacs when I'm in a text terminal (like right now) because I > haven't figured out how to use Xemacs' menus from the text terminal > and some of the functions of Xemacs (e.g., syntax highlighting) seem > inaccessible without mouse access to the proper menus. In addition, > the cut and paste works differently in Xemacs (in a text terminal) > than in any other text-based program, and it always messes with me. I > am sure that these things are configureable, but I haven't found them > and I don't feel like learning Lisp and reading the source. > I'm not sure how to access the menus in a terminal, or why you'd even want to, so I can't help with that. As far as the syntax highlighting and cut-and-paste behavior go, here are the relevant snippets of my .emacs. This tells XEmacs to always use the maximum amount of syntax highlighting with colors rather than fonts, and to have mouse middle-clicks paste wherever the cursor is rather than where the mouse is clicked. I believe that's what you were looking for. (custom-set-variables '(mouse-yank-at-point t) '(font-lock-use-fonts nil) '(font-lock-use-colors t) '(font-lock-maximum-size 256000)) (setq-default font-lock-maximum-decoration t) (require 'font-lock) (custom-set-faces) -- Eric Gillespie, Jr. <*> [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Man is a rope, tied between beast and overman--a rope over an abyss. A dangerous across, a dangerous on-the-way, a dangerous looking-back, a dangerous shuddering and stopping." --Friedrich Nietzsche pgpU2nTYN086m.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: emacs or xemacs ?
rob rote, > "Richard E. Hawkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > also, using emacs on CCIE (*Control Key In Exile) keyboard, causing > > enough long reaches on my little finger sthat I had to see a quack, > > is probably part (put a minor part) of my avoiding either. > You probably know this, but you can easily remap caps-lock etc. to be > control... Also, you can get a better keyboard for about $3 at > goodwill here. Of course that still won't help you if you prefer > vim ... nothing will :> Yep. But at the time, I was either on a non-unix machine using telnet, or at a decstation that I couldn't do that to. As for the mac running macbsd, ignore those rumors that I did something to the keyboard. But that little piece of plastic that I found in my desk sure looks like the toggle piece in the capslock on a mac keyboard might look like--but since I'd never open a university keyboard, I wouldn't know :) --
Re: emacs or xemacs ?
"Richard E. Hawkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > also, using emacs on CCIE (*Control Key In Exile) keyboard, causing > enough long reaches on my little finger sthat I had to see a quack, > is probably part (put a minor part) of my avoiding either. You probably know this, but you can easily remap caps-lock etc. to be control... Also, you can get a better keyboard for about $3 at goodwill here. Of course that still won't help you if you prefer vim ... nothing will :> (holy-war-aversion-disclaimer: Yes, that was a joke, and yes, I prefer emacs, but no, I don't think it's for everyone, and yes, I have used vi (minimally), and can understand the appeal.) FWIW -- Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PGP=E80E0D04F521A094 532B97F5D64E3930
Re: emacs or xemacs ?
Kris Kried, > I honestly don't mean to start a holy war here, but I'd like to > know: Is there anyone who prefers Emacs to XEmacs, and why? If you change "prefer" to "dislike less," then me :) I still use emacs for some things that I haven't figured out how to get vim to do. Xemacs has extra buttons on the screen, which take up screen space. The last line on the terminal in vi takes more than enough, I don't want to give up even more . . . also, using emacs on CCIE (*Control Key In Exile) keyboard, causing enough long reaches on my little finger sthat I had to see a quack, is probably part (put a minor part) of my avoiding either. I want to do it, whatever "it" is, with as few keystrokes as possible, and without my keys leaving the keyboard to grab a mouse (though I use it to cut & paste for editing.) And I want *all* of my screen real estate, so I stay away from xemacs (and anything made by microsoft after about '93) hawk --
Re: emacs or xemacs ?
On Wed, Sep 15, 1999 at 02:17:53AM -0400, Rob Mahurin wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 14, 1999 at 07:32:22PM -0400, Kristopher Johnson wrote:
> > I honestly don't mean to start a holy war here, but I'd like to
> > know: Is there anyone who prefers Emacs to XEmacs, and why?
>
> I use emacs when I'm in a text terminal (like right now) because I
> haven't figured out how to use Xemacs' menus from the text terminal
> and some of the functions of Xemacs (e.g., syntax highlighting) seem
> inaccessible without mouse access to the proper menus. In addition,
> the cut and paste works differently in Xemacs (in a text terminal)
> than in any other text-based program, and it always messes with me. I
> am sure that these things are configureable, but I haven't found them
> and I don't feel like learning Lisp and reading the source.
>
> This preference means that I use emacs -nw to write email from mutt,
> even in X.
try this for giggles here are snippets from .muttrc and
.emacs_mutt.el
I run this in a transparent aterm with yellow text and on a dark
background (I tell you this because that colors I have below will look
really nasty if you're one of those black-on-white people :).
-Michael
.muttrc ##
set editor="xemacs -nw -q -l /home/einstein/mstenner/.emacs_mutt.el"
color hdrdefault cyandefault
color indicator black green
color markersyellow red
color tree green default
color status black green
color quoted green default
color signature magenta default
## .emacs_mutt.el #
;; -*- lisp -*-
; this is where I put my private lisp stuff
(setq load-path (cons "/home/einstein/mstenner/lib/lisp/" load-path))
(setq mouse-yank-at-point t) ; mouse insert where cursor is
(line-number-mode 1)
(column-number-mode 1)
(setq scroll-step 10)
(keyboard-translate ?\C-h ?\C-?)
(keyboard-translate ?\C-? ?\C-h)
(setq default-major-mode 'text-mode) ; turn on text-mode (sort of)
; turn on auto-fill
(setq text-mode-hook
'(lambda () (auto-fill-mode 1)))
; don't clutter with "~" files --- put them in .trash/
(defun make-backup-file-name (file)
(concat "/home/einstein/mstenner/.trash/" (file-name-nondirectory file) "~"))
(defun backup-file-name-p (file)
(string-match "\\~$" file))
; allows font-locking even on the terminal
(if (eq 'tty (device-type))
(set-device-class nil 'color))
; general color config
(set-face-background 'modeline "black")
(set-face-background 'modeline "green")
; here is where I associate faces with regex patterns.
(defconst text-font-lock-keywords
'(
("^On .*" . font-lock-variable-name-face) ; inital reply line
("^> .*" . font-lock-comment-face) ; quoted message
)
"Subdued level highlighting for Mutt mode.")
(font-lock-mode) ; turn on font-lock-mode
; cyan blue magenta red green yellow white black == good color options
; Here is where I associate colors with faces
(set-face-foreground 'font-lock-variable-name-face "cyan") ; inital reply line
(set-face-foreground 'font-lock-comment-face "green") ; quoted message
#
--
Michael Stenner Office Phone: 919-660-2513
Duke University, Dept. of Physics [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Box 90305, Durham N.C. 27708-0305
Re: emacs or xemacs ?
On Tue, Sep 14, 1999 at 07:32:22PM -0400, Kristopher Johnson wrote: > I honestly don't mean to start a holy war here, but I'd like to > know: Is there anyone who prefers Emacs to XEmacs, and why? I use emacs when I'm in a text terminal (like right now) because I haven't figured out how to use Xemacs' menus from the text terminal and some of the functions of Xemacs (e.g., syntax highlighting) seem inaccessible without mouse access to the proper menus. In addition, the cut and paste works differently in Xemacs (in a text terminal) than in any other text-based program, and it always messes with me. I am sure that these things are configureable, but I haven't found them and I don't feel like learning Lisp and reading the source. This preference means that I use emacs -nw to write email from mutt, even in X. Sometimes I load X just to use Xemacs. And I'm hoping now that someone will answer me with "do this to fix those problems, HAND." So apparently I prefer Xemacs. Rob -- Santa Claus is watching!
Re: emacs or xemacs ?
I do. Why? Mostly don't know. Just familiar with it. At one time it was impossible to get both to work properly on the same system. I did not want to give up emacs for XEmacs. There were several things that did not work in XEmacs, when I first installed and I did not have the patience to find out why. If I had more time, maybe! Some of the keystrokes are different, etc, etc... The reason such questions frequently cause "holy wars" is that a text editor tends to become the extension of the user. Once you learn vi, you do not want to change. Once you learn emacs, you don't want to change. [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kristopher Johnson) writes: > I honestly don't mean to start a holy war here, but I'd like to > know: Is there anyone who prefers Emacs to XEmacs, and why? -- *** Running Debian Linux *** * For God so loved the world that He gave his only begotten Son, * * that whoever believes in Him should not perish...John 3:16 * * W. Paul Mills * Topeka, Kansas, U.S.A. * * EMAIL= [EMAIL PROTECTED] * WWW= http://Mills-USA.com/ * * Bill, I was there several years ago, why would I want to go back? * * pgp public key on keyservers everywhere? */ --
Re: emacs or xemacs ?
Jakob 'sparky' Kaivo wrote: > > On Tue, 14 Sep 1999, Juli-Manel Merino Vidal wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > where can I found a document describing the differences between emacs > > and xemacs ? > > > > Thanks. > > Check the XEmacs web page: > http://www.xemacs.org/ > > You might also look at the Emacs web pages: > Official: http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/emacs.html > Unofficial: http://www.emacs.org/ I honestly don't mean to start a holy war here, but I'd like to know: Is there anyone who prefers Emacs to XEmacs, and why? - Kris
Re: emacs or xemacs ?
On Tue, 14 Sep 1999, Juli-Manel Merino Vidal wrote: > Hi all, > > where can I found a document describing the differences between emacs > and xemacs ? > > Thanks. Check the XEmacs web page: http://www.xemacs.org/ You might also look at the Emacs web pages: Official: http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/emacs.html Unofficial: http://www.emacs.org/ -- Jakob 'sparky' Kaivo - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.ndn.net/ "As time goes on, my signature gets shorter and shorter..." - me
emacs or xemacs ?
Hi all, where can I found a document describing the differences between emacs and xemacs ? Thanks. -- --- -> Powered by Debian/GNU Linux <- --> Linux User 140860 Machine 61143 <-- Juli-Manel Merino Vidal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>- -- -- -- -- - - http://jmmv.cjb.net/ My homepage | | | | | | | | | | | http://www.debian.org / Best linux dist. | | | | | | | | | | http://www.gnu.org / GNU Project ---| | | | | |
