Vegard Øye <[email protected]> writes: > On 2010-07-23 15:18, Štěpán Němec wrote: > >> Vimpulse uses remapping at a few places so I thought I'd mention >> that, as AFAIK Vegard tries to keep things XEmacs-compatible (and >> has my full moral support ;-D). > > Yeah, I'm aware that XEmacs lacks remapping. The `vimpulse-remap' > macro tries to make do by storing remappings in an association list, > whence they can be retrieved by a specific function like > `vimpulse-operator-remapping'. There is no general solution.
Yeah, what I meant was vimpulse-compatibility.el lines 23nn. >> I'd love to be using XEmacs (see the recent copyright thread on this >> list), but it seems to only work reasonably well out-of-the-box in >> the terminal for me. > > Are there any technical advantages to using XEmacs nowadays? No idea. GNU Emacs' redisplay seems to be getting annoyingly slow (i.e. with heavy or even not-so-heavy font-locking, scrolling is sometimes rather painful, and it's probably only going to get worse with bidi), but given that I haven't been able to test GUI XEmacs lately, I have no idea if it's better. The incentive for me would be the "free as in freedom, not as in Free Software Foundation" ;-). Stephen J. Turnbull sums a few issues up nicely in this mail: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.xemacs.beta/33144> Štěpán _______________________________________________ implementations-list mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/implementations-list
