begin quoting David M. Cook as of Sat, Jul 02, 2005 at 08:51:41PM -0700: > On Sat, Jul 02, 2005 at 05:50:48PM -0700, Stewart Stremler wrote: > > > And I do. And I think the damage has been done. > > So it looks like we have one of those agree-to-disagree situations. > > OK, no biggie, except for its kick-ass Python mode I'm not *that* attached > to emacs.
I actually really like the _idea_ of emacs, I just can't stand the implementation. > But...damage? I have a feeling you're not talking about Carpal > Tunnel Syndrome. Correct. I think -- but can't prove or disprove -- that emacs constributes to the idea that developers should build frameworks instead of cooperating small programs. Large, complicated, powerful, all-encompassing frameworks. Of course, Emacs dates back to the time when operating systems were considered a necessary evil, and programmers developed environments that had as little to do with the OS as possible. Other "environments" with this attitude are Forth and Smalltalk, so it's not an uncommon one -- but Forth and Smalltalk aren't associated with UNIX much, if at all. -Stewart "Even vi(m) isn't as embeddable as I'd like it to be" Stremler
pgp2X0DwsDj2v.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
