Another minor tip that has helped me with emacs -- I doubt I could use it otherwise -- is to remap the Caps Lock key to Ctrl.
On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 10:41 AM, Joe Bogner <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm a heavy user of emacs. I switched about 2 years ago after using > vim for a few years. Prior to that, I was using the IDE of whatever > language I'm in. > > Emacs has a steep learning curve, but it's become the perfect > environment for me. I use the various modules for each of the > languages I program in. Most are built on top of the comint mode. The > j-mode is quite good. The syntax highlighting and matching is very > nice. It works the same way on linux or windows. > > I also had wrist pain after becoming a heavy emacs user. I also had > pain with vim, but just pain in different fingers. Emacs has largely > solved the problem for me with two modules - key-chord mode and > ace-jump mode. > > I use key-chords on the home row for common tasks (jw for save). I've > mapped a bunch of bindings to ctrl+l, which is more natural than > ctrl+c for me. With ace-jump mode, I can hit two keys jw to jump to > any word on the screen or jk to jump to any character. > > When my fingers start to burn, I switch my bindings out to use > different fingers. > > Emacs evil-mode mode is really good too for modal editing, which > sometimes I enjoy when I'm doing a bunch of maintenance work > (modifying text vs composing text). It emulates the vim key bindings > nearly perfectly > > Org-mode is fantastic for literate programming or just keeping an > executable notebook. I also use it to track my time. I can even run j > from within my org-mode snippets with the org-babel-j plugin I wrote: > https://github.com/joebo/org-babel-j > > Emacs macros have saved me a ton of time too over the years. Vim > macros were ok too, I just found the emacs ones to be much easier to > work with. > > Just wanted to share my perspective on emacs. Definitely not intended > to start a vim/emacs comparison "war" > > > On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 9:28 AM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Nowadays we seem to be plagued with a surplus of code that almost no > > one understands how to use. > > > > For myself, my wrists have recovered (you've seen how much text I dump > > on the lists here) but I spend most of my coding time trying to > > connect the dots - coding possibilities I see with [hopefully] useful > > results for other people. > > > > Put differently, one "virtue" of a good coder is "do not repeat > > yourself" but there are two related virtues: "repeat yourself" and "do > > not do it at all". Needless to say, this can get confusing to reason > > about - if you try to do that in isolation - but they are all > > worthwhile approaches, when used judiciously. > > > > Thanks, > > > > -- > > Raul > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 9:15 AM, Roger Hui <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Arthur Whitney was talking about a common colleague one time. "E can > >> program faster than I can type!" (E is probably not anybody any of you > >> would know.) > >> > >> > >> On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 5:58 AM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >>> I've dabbled in elisp - I wrote a minor mode for APL back in the '90s. > >>> It was a fun challenge, but physically painful, and I had to give up > >>> emacs. > >>> > >>> See... a problem with emacs is the keyboard chording system - if you > >>> are typing alt-shift A, control-P, ... or whatever, and are going 80 > >>> words per minute, and your posture isn't the greatest? I was doing > >>> something like that and my wrists started hurting terribly. I was > >>> afraid I would not be able to type at all. > >>> > >>> So I switched to vi, and switched my coding style from being prolific > >>> to thinking a lot and typing just a bit. This gave me a lot of > >>> appreciation to "old school style" and also gave my wrists a chance to > >>> recover. You can do a lot with small bits of shell script (or other > >>> coding), some careful thought, and working with people. > >>> > >>> So that is my signature, nowadays - I do not code a lot, and I put a > >>> lot of thought (perhaps too much thought) into the code I do write. My > >>> wrists thank me (usually - sometimes they still grumble), though > >>> sometimes I envy people who can comfortably crank out tons of code. > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Raul > >>> > >>> On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 7:01 AM, David Lambert <[email protected] > > > >>> wrote: > >>> > I have a quarter million lines of FORTRAN written over the years in > the > >>> > various versions. Mostly f77 using ! comments, but not entirely. My > >>> goal: > >>> > convert the entire code to f2008. Parts A, B, and C are continuation > >>> mark, > >>> > code, and comment. At this stage I'm addressing various forms of > >>> > continuation lines, an example: > >>> > > >>> > call s( ! comment maybe > >>> > ! intervening remarks > >>> > *arg) > >>> > character*8 a=/'hi'/ ! or whatever > >>> > > >>> > becomes > >>> > > >>> > call s& ! comment maybe > >>> > ! intervening remarks > >>> > &arg) > >>> > character(len=8) :: a = (/'hi'/) ! fixed with sed > >>> > > >>> > Later I'll have emacs reindent the whole thing. Such transformations > >>> ignore > >>> > replacing common blocks with modules. A build with gfortran will > catch > >>> > problems that our current compiler does not. Transforming the code > with > >>> j > >>> > makes my job fun, whereas becoming an elisp expert hasn't ever > grabbed my > >>> > attention. > >>> > > >>> > On 01/28/2014 07:00 AM, [email protected] wrote: > >>> > Message: 1 > >>> > Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 22:30:14 -0500 > >>> > From: David Lambert <[email protected]> > >>> > To: chat <[email protected]> > >>> > Subject: [Jchat] FSM enhancement proposal > >>> > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > >>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > I have information of the forms ABC, AB, BC, AC, A, B, C which I'd > like > >>> > to separate into 3 boxes. If a part is missing the box should be > >>> > empty. I think it is impossible with the current FSM implementation > >>> > because it must read a character to yield output. With only one > >>> > character on input I cannot obtain '';'';C as output, or any three > >>> > boxes. I haven't investigated emit vector but I don't see how it will > >>> > help. The 3 boxes preserve the classification work that's already > been > >>> > accomplished, and I can use _3&([\) to generate a useful array. > >>> > > >>> > We could enhance the FSM retaining backward compatibility. I'd > prefer > >>> > to pass a gerund as an additional part of x, have the Function code > >>> > specify to use it as an agenda determined by the output code. The > agenda > >>> > would monadically process the matched items. It seems to me that > such a > >>> > j FSM would have the full capability of the gnu flex program, > excepting > >>> > the automatic generation of the state table. > >>> > > >>> > Perhaps a new output code to emit something ( ace if F is 0 otherwise > >>> > i.0 ? ) and change state without reading the next input item would > be a > >>> > simpler solution to treat the case I've presented. > >>> > > >>> > Or this may be far too complicated and I need to write my own > function. > >>> > It would surprise me if the gerund concept were not part of the > original > >>> > implementation debate. And it would surprise me to learn that I > >>> > understand the FSM. For now I'll use a flex bison program. > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > ------------------------------ > >>> > > >>> > Message: 2 > >>> > Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 22:39:23 -0500 > >>> > From: Raul Miller <[email protected]> > >>> > To: Chat forum <[email protected]> > >>> > Subject: Re: [Jchat] FSM enhancement proposal > >>> > Message-ID: > >>> > <CAD2jOU_tfv6mDdU0o_E5nteCf0k9=v1x_isiaph1omscsud...@mail.gmail.com> > >>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > I am having trouble understanding your specification. > >>> > > >>> > Do you mean that you have a sequence of letters, such as: > >>> > > >>> > BBBCCCACBBBCBBAAAAABAABACACACC > >>> > > >>> > And you want to separate them into boxes whose letters are lexically > >>> > increasing? > >>> > > >>> > I'd not bother with ;: for that, I'd do something like this: > >>> > > >>> > (] <;.1~ 1 , 2 >:/\ 'ABC' i. ]) 'BBBCCCACBBBCBBAAAAABAABACACACC' > >>> > > >>> > Though if you prefer gnu flex and bison, I'm sure you can do it that > >>> > way too, with a little time and effort. > >>> > > >>> > Thanks, > >>> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>> > For information about J forums see > http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > >>> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
