On 11/28/2009 10:23 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Debayan Banerjee wrote:
Well one does need an editor for development. Assuming vim and emacs
have roughly equal user bases, chosing emacs over vim for the
distribution shows Fedora packagers' personal preference too. I guess
both vim and emacs
On Mon, 2009-11-30 at 11:26 -0500, Casey Dahlin wrote:
On 11/28/2009 10:23 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Debayan Banerjee wrote:
Well one does need an editor for development. Assuming vim and emacs
have roughly equal user bases, chosing emacs over vim for the
distribution shows Fedora
On 11/30/2009 11:49 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Mon, 2009-11-30 at 11:26 -0500, Casey Dahlin wrote:
On 11/28/2009 10:23 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Debayan Banerjee wrote:
Well one does need an editor for development. Assuming vim and emacs
have roughly equal user bases, chosing emacs over vim
I consider real men to be a gender-neutral complement. I know women who
gladly receive it and exchange it amongst themselves.
Since we're offering Casey money to do things¹ today:
I will send you a check for $5 if you admit that real men is _in no way_ a
gender-neutral compliment.
since
On 12/01/2009 02:59 AM, Muayyad AlSadi wrote:
I consider real men to be a gender-neutral complement. I know women who
gladly receive it and exchange it amongst themselves.
Since we're offering Casey money to do things¹ today:
I will send you a check for $5 if you admit that real men is _in
On Fri, 2009-11-27 at 23:49 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 11:19 PM, Braden McDaniel wrote:
I'm an emacs user who's nearly completely useless in vi. But, really...
it just doesn't matter if emacs isn't installed by default. If you want
it, you know how to get it.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Adam Williamson wrote:
On Fri, 2009-11-27 at 23:49 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 11:19 PM, Braden McDaniel wrote:
I'm an emacs user who's nearly completely useless in vi. But, really...
it just doesn't matter if emacs
2009/11/29 Gregory Hosler ghos...@redhat.com:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 11/28/2009 02:32 AM, Debayan Banerjee wrote:
2009/11/28 Rahul Sundaram
Why? It's just shows your personal preference for a editor. Emacs is
certainly not needed for software
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 11/28/2009 02:32 AM, Debayan Banerjee wrote:
2009/11/28 Rahul Sundaram
Why? It's just shows your personal preference for a editor. Emacs is
certainly not needed for software development.
Well one does need an editor for development. Assuming vim and emacs
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 6:23 AM, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote:
Both vim and Emacs are obsolescent and hard to use. Kate FTW!
Hmm, at this point I would have thought nano would be the editor with
one of the lowest learning curve in those very pleasant moments when
an inexperienced
2009/11/28 Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 7:05 AM, Chris Adams cmad...@hiwaay.net wrote:
Once upon a time, Orcan Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com said:
I wish
vi had some tutorial the way emacs does, so one don't get lost in it.
In vim, hit F1.
It's :help
--
Guido
2009/11/28 Orcan Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 11:19 PM, Braden McDaniel wrote:
I'm an emacs user who's nearly completely useless in vi. But, really...
it just doesn't matter if emacs isn't installed by default. If you want
it, you know how to get it. And let's be
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 10:02 PM, Debayan Banerjee wrote:
Well one does need an editor for development. Assuming vim and emacs
have roughly equal user bases, chosing emacs over vim for the
distribution shows Fedora packagers' personal preference too. I guess
both vim and emacs should be
Debayan Banerjee wrote:
Well one does need an editor for development. Assuming vim and emacs
have roughly equal user bases, chosing emacs over vim for the
distribution shows Fedora packagers' personal preference too. I guess
both vim and emacs should be available.
Both vim and Emacs are
I would argue otherwise, considering the flexibility of both vim and Emacs.
Personally, I like Emacs, and I have a hard time dealing with vi and its
derivatives. But, this really isn't the place to start YET ANOTHER Emacs vs.
vi[m] vs. {INSERT YOUR PREFERRED EDITOR} flamewar.
Argue that on IRC,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 11/28/2009 02:32 AM, Debayan Banerjee wrote:
2009/11/28 Rahul Sundaram
Why? It's just shows your personal preference for a editor. Emacs is
certainly not needed for software development.
Well one does need an editor for
I just did a new install on a spare laptop. I chose the Software
Development option.
Emacs did not get installed.
Also, although neither mysql-devel, nor postgresql-devel, nor even
libtool-ltdl-devel got installed, I ended up with a huge number of -devel
packages, many of whom, from my
On 11/28/2009 02:12 AM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
I just did a new install on a spare laptop. I chose the Software
Development option.
Emacs did not get installed.
Also, although neither mysql-devel, nor postgresql-devel, nor even
libtool-ltdl-devel got installed, I ended up with a huge
2009/11/28 Rahul Sundaram sunda...@fedoraproject.org:
Why? It's just shows your personal preference for a editor. Emacs is
certainly not needed for software development.
Well one does need an editor for development. Assuming vim and emacs
have roughly equal user bases, chosing emacs over vim
Rahul Sundaram writes:
On 11/28/2009 02:12 AM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
I just did a new install on a spare laptop. I chose the Software
Development option.
Emacs did not get installed.
Also, although neither mysql-devel, nor postgresql-devel, nor even
libtool-ltdl-devel got installed, I ended
Debayan Banerjee writes:
2009/11/28 Rahul Sundaram sunda...@fedoraproject.org:
Why? It's just shows your personal preference for a editor. Emacs is
certainly not needed for software development.
Well one does need an editor for development. Assuming vim and emacs
have roughly equal user
On 11/28/2009 02:32 AM, Debayan Banerjee wrote:
2009/11/28 Rahul Sundaram
Why? It's just shows your personal preference for a editor. Emacs is
certainly not needed for software development.
Well one does need an editor for development. Assuming vim and emacs
have roughly equal user
On Fri, 2009-11-27 at 16:06 -0500, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Let's say I want to do software development. I make an appropriate selection
when intalling Fedora 12. What editor am I expected to use?
The development group in comps does not list any editor by default.
Those come from the Editors
On Fri, 2009-11-27 at 14:48 -0800, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Fri, 2009-11-27 at 16:06 -0500, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Let's say I want to do software development. I make an appropriate
selection
when intalling Fedora 12. What editor am I expected to use?
The development group in comps
I can't seem to invoke emacs even when I have it installed. Every time I do,
it says the command isn't found. I had to go and find it and add a symlink
to the $HOME/bin folder so that it would work... I know that shouldn't be
happening...
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 10:19 PM, Braden McDaniel
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 11:19 PM, Braden McDaniel wrote:
I'm an emacs user who's nearly completely useless in vi. But, really...
it just doesn't matter if emacs isn't installed by default. If you want
it, you know how to get it. And let's be frank: emacs is not something
that a user who is
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 7:05 AM, Chris Adams cmad...@hiwaay.net wrote:
Once upon a time, Orcan Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com said:
I wish
vi had some tutorial the way emacs does, so one don't get lost in it.
In vim, hit F1.
Gives me GNOME Terminal Manual :(
But you can always run vimtutor
27 matches
Mail list logo
