Re: emacs hate (was Re: qmail hate -- or love ( and the new KDE hate))

On 2008-03-02 at 05:46 -0800, Joshua Juran wrote: > If ssh could just pick a free port and > then set an environment variable saying which one it was, that would be > very cool, except of course for allowing ANYONE ON THE REMOTE SYSTEM to > connect to my forwa

Re: emacs hate (was Re: qmail hate -- or love ( and the new KDE hate))

On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 8:16 AM, Peter da Silva wrote: > On 2008-03-02, at 05:50, demerphq wrote: > > *Nix editors are laughingly hateful across the board. Lots of > > features, too bad about the goddamned USER INTERFACE. > > What's an example of an editor that isn't hateful? I was going to pos

Re: vi love (was Re: emacs hate)

On Sun, Mar 02, 2008 at 06:30:01PM +0100, Ann Barcomb wrote: > On Sun, 2 Mar 2008, Abigail wrote: > > >My biggest hate regarding 'vi' are those wannabee-Un^WLinux distros > >that launch some editor when you type 'vi' on the command line, but > >which isn't vi at all. > > No kidding. I have to ke

Re: vi love (was Re: emacs hate)

* Ann Barcomb [2008-03-02 18:35]: > I was starting to think I was the only person in the world who > would rather have the original. http://ex-vi.sourceforge.net/ at least indicates you're not. Regards, -- Aristotle Pagaltzis //

Re: vi love (was Re: emacs hate)

On 2008-03-02, at 11:30, Ann Barcomb wrote: On Sun, 2 Mar 2008, Abigail wrote: My biggest hate regarding 'vi' are those wannabee-Un^WLinux distros that launch some editor when you type 'vi' on the command line, but which isn't vi at all. No kidding. I have to keep a vimrc file handy to get

Re: emacs hate (was Re: qmail hate -- or love ( and the new KDE hate))

It was thus said that the Great Peter da Silva once stated: > On 2008-03-02, at 05:50, demerphq wrote: > >*Nix editors are laughingly hateful across the board. Lots of > >features, too bad about the goddamned USER INTERFACE. > > What's an example of an editor that isn't hateful? For me, it's IB

vi love (was Re: emacs hate)

On Sun, 2 Mar 2008, Abigail wrote: My biggest hate regarding 'vi' are those wannabee-Un^WLinux distros that launch some editor when you type 'vi' on the command line, but which isn't vi at all. No kidding. I have to keep a vimrc file handy to get it to behave like real vi. I was starting to

Re: emacs hate (was Re: qmail hate -- or love ( and the new KDE hate))

* Joshua Juran [2008-03-02 16:20]: > On Mar 2, 2008, at 6:29 AM, Andy Armstrong wrote: >> Doesn't a little script that does rsync, edit, rsync cut it? > > Assuming you mean from the local system: No. That fails to > reuse not only the context implicit in the remote shell > (foreign host, current d

Re: emacs hate (was Re: qmail hate -- or love ( and the new KDE hate))

On Sun, Mar 02, 2008 at 05:39:33PM +0100, demerphq wrote: > On 02/03/2008, Peter da Silva wrote: > > On 2008-03-02, at 05:50, demerphq wrote: > > > *Nix editors are laughingly hateful across the board. Lots of > > > features, too bad about the goddamned USER INTERFACE. > > > > > > What's an exam

Re: emacs hate (was Re: qmail hate -- or love ( and the new KDE hate))

In article <5a834e35-b787-46d0-aa59-bd5f8c7de...@gmail.com>, Joshua Juran wrote: >On Mar 2, 2008, at 3:50 AM, demerphq wrote: >> *Nix editors are laughingly hateful across the board. Lots of >> features, too bad about the goddamned USER INTERFACE. >How else do you make it work on a vt220? It's

Re: emacs hate (was Re: qmail hate -- or love ( and the new KDE hate))

On 02/03/2008, Peter da Silva wrote: > On 2008-03-02, at 05:50, demerphq wrote: > > *Nix editors are laughingly hateful across the board. Lots of > > features, too bad about the goddamned USER INTERFACE. > > > What's an example of an editor that isn't hateful? To do that I would have to find on

Re: emacs hate (was Re: qmail hate -- or love ( and the new KDE hate))

On 2008-03-02, at 05:50, demerphq wrote: *Nix editors are laughingly hateful across the board. Lots of features, too bad about the goddamned USER INTERFACE. What's an example of an editor that isn't hateful? Because I've never run across an editor on any other system that didn't suck by comp

Uncontrollable Tool Tips

Tool Tips are quite possibly the most annoying feature of software today. They constantly get in the way of what I'm reading or trying to read. They are distracting. And most of the time, there is no way to disable them. Sometimes they don't even get out of the way and then overlap other windowed a

Re: emacs hate (was Re: qmail hate -- or love ( and the new KDE hate))

On 02/03/2008, Aristotle Pagaltzis wrote: > * demerphq [2008-03-02 13:00]: > > > *Nix editors are laughingly hateful across the board. Lots of > > features, too bad about the goddamned USER INTERFACE. > > > Win32 editors are *so* much better. > Win32 editors are laughingly hateful across the bo

Re: emacs hate (was Re: qmail hate -- or love ( and the new KDE hate))

On Mar 2, 2008, at 6:29 AM, Andy Armstrong wrote: On 2 Mar 2008, at 13:46, Joshua Juran wrote: I tried setting up a local HTTP server with a CGI script that invokes my preferred editor, forwarded the port over ssh, and then using an 'editor' that sends the file over HTTP and receives it ba

Re: emacs hate (was Re: qmail hate -- or love ( and the new KDE hate))

* demerphq [2008-03-02 13:00]: > *Nix editors are laughingly hateful across the board. Lots of > features, too bad about the goddamned USER INTERFACE. Win32 editors are *so* much better. Regards, -- Aristotle Pagaltzis //

Re: emacs hate (was Re: qmail hate -- or love ( and the new KDE hate))

On 2 Mar 2008, at 13:46, Joshua Juran wrote: I tried setting up a local HTTP server with a CGI script that invokes my preferred editor, forwarded the port over ssh, and then using an 'editor' that sends the file over HTTP and receives it back. It basically works, except that ssh port forwar

Re: emacs hate (was Re: qmail hate -- or love ( and the new KDE hate))

On Mar 2, 2008, at 4:59 AM, demerphq wrote: On 02/03/2008, Joshua Juran wrote: On Mar 2, 2008, at 3:50 AM, demerphq wrote: *Nix editors are laughingly hateful across the board. Lots of features, too bad about the goddamned USER INTERFACE. How else do you make it work on a vt220? It's not

Re: emacs hate (was Re: qmail hate -- or love ( and the new KDE hate))

On 02/03/2008, Joshua Juran wrote: > On Mar 2, 2008, at 3:50 AM, demerphq wrote: > > > On 02/03/2008, Peter da Silva wrote: > >> On 2008-03-01, at 16:02, Aristotle Pagaltzis wrote: > >>> * Nicholas Clark [2008-02-28 23:30]: > I felt that emacs jumped the shark > >>> > >> > >>> I thou

Re: emacs hate (was Re: qmail hate -- or love ( and the new KDE hate))

On Mar 2, 2008, at 3:50 AM, demerphq wrote: On 02/03/2008, Peter da Silva wrote: On 2008-03-01, at 16:02, Aristotle Pagaltzis wrote: * Nicholas Clark [2008-02-28 23:30]: I felt that emacs jumped the shark I thought emacs was *born* on the other side of the shark. Emacs is older than

Re: emacs hate (was Re: qmail hate -- or love ( and the new KDE hate))

On 02/03/2008, Peter da Silva wrote: > On 2008-03-01, at 16:02, Aristotle Pagaltzis wrote: > > * Nicholas Clark [2008-02-28 23:30]: > >> I felt that emacs jumped the shark > > > > > I thought emacs was *born* on the other side of the shark. > > > Emacs is older than the shark. The shark was b

Re: emacs hate (was Re: qmail hate -- or love ( and the new KDE hate))

On 2008-03-01, at 16:02, Aristotle Pagaltzis wrote: * Nicholas Clark [2008-02-28 23:30]: I felt that emacs jumped the shark I thought emacs was *born* on the other side of the shark. Emacs is older than the shark. The shark was born on the wrong side of Emacs.