On Thu, Sep 21, 2000 at 02:38:22PM +1100, Ben Leslie wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Stuart Cooper wrote:
> I personally have always used plain GNU Emacs, rather than XEmacs. Can
> anyone give me a run down on why I would want to run XEmacs? From what I
> have seen/used (which isn't exactly in-depth), XEmacs seems to have a toolbar
> and a web browser in it, but that is the only difference I could find so far.
i think the fundamental (technical) difference is that xemacs can
display images along with text, and support different sized/styled
fonts/variable width fonts in the same buffer.
this leads to several things: web browser, button bar, swish buttons
in configure, mine sweeper, etc
see http://www.xemacs.org/About/XEmacsVsGNUemacs.html
the main reason i prefer it, is it seems to have better defaults than
emacs. lots of little things are setup how i would anyway.
handles multiple windows a little better than emacs.
also lots of extra packages (like jde - not that i use jde) which are
available for emacs come already bundled with xemacs. makes for a big
download tho ;) thats the main reason i tend to mention it here,
since its easier than saying "get emacs, and download xx from yy"
despite it being an "X" version, i keep being impressed with how well
xemacs handles displaying the same buffer in both text/x.
apparently there are a few elisp differences, primarily to do with
fonts/faces and menus.
--
- Gus
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
More Info: http://slug.org.au/lists/listinfo/slug
