On Dec 17, 2013, at 8:24 AM, Tim Visher wrote: > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 8:21 AM, Lee Spector <lspec...@hampshire.edu> wrote: >> On Dec 17, 2013, at 6:01 AM, Cedric Greevey wrote: >>> >>> Calling emacs "incidental complexity" is like calling the North Pole "a bit >>> nippy this time of year". :) >> >> The thing is, it's actually possible to have the power of emacs without the >> incidental complexity of currently available emacs versions. It has been >> done before, e.g. with FRED (FRED Resembles Emacs Deliberately, in Macintosh >> Common Lisp). Emacs under the hood, but modern GUI design and usability. >
Certainly a step in the right direction, IMHO, but from what I recall from the last time I checked (and seem to have confirm from a quick new check) setup and integration with Clojure are non-trivial. I haven't had the full experience because I never made it over this setup-usability hurdle. Also, the mac-only thing is less than ideal and it should be possible to do something similar in a cross-platform way, although to be fair FRED was also mac only. -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
