the Modernization of Emacs
in [Lisp]
|
From: august1 on 11 Apr 2006 15:41 Xah Lee пиÑал(а): > Things emacs need to change for modern world: I dislike this attitude somehow. May I ask you to change modern world instead?
From: Tim Bradshaw on 11 Apr 2006 17:00 Sacha wrote: > I don't quite understand what's with unix, sure it's a good server platform, > but there's a world outside it. Some of my customers barely can use a mouse, > I'm not anywhere close to make them switch to linux ! Ignore the specific examples. The point is that when you program computers - as when you do almost anything - you will spend your life dealing with overcomplex crufty systems that don't really work properly and have all sorts of historical baggage associated with them. Most of those systems will just get in the way - however much you learn they'll just cause you pain: programming is basically pain. Some very few of these systems, crufty as they are, can be beaten into tools of incredible efficiency. Emacs is one of those few. And for all sorts of reasons, in almost all cases you're better off learning it as it is than trying to make it fit with whatever is fashionable today: in the same way that you're better off learning the guitar than inventing a new, better guitar. --tim
From: David Kastrup on 11 Apr 2006 17:07 "Tim Bradshaw" <tfb+google(a)tfeb.org> writes: > Sacha wrote: > >> I don't quite understand what's with unix, sure it's a good server platform, >> but there's a world outside it. Some of my customers barely can use a mouse, >> I'm not anywhere close to make them switch to linux ! > > Ignore the specific examples. The point is that when you program > computers - as when you do almost anything - you will spend your > life dealing with overcomplex crufty systems that don't really work > properly and have all sorts of historical baggage associated with > them. Most of those systems will just get in the way - however much > you learn they'll just cause you pain: programming is basically > pain. Some very few of these systems, crufty as they are, can be > beaten into tools of incredible efficiency. Emacs is one of those > few. Emacs has been beaten into a black hole. Get too close to it, and you'll never escape again. It bends reality. > And for all sorts of reasons, in almost all cases you're better off > learning it as it is than trying to make it fit with whatever is > fashionable today: in the same way that you're better off learning > the guitar than inventing a new, better guitar. A harp. Lots and lots of strings, and pedals, so that you are not restricted to A minor, but can also play M-C-major. Harp harp harp. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
From: Miles Bader on 11 Apr 2006 17:15 M Jared Finder <jared(a)hpalace.com> writes: > also rebinds C-a to select all, instead of beginning-of-line. Erg. That's just evil... -Miles -- "An atheist doesn't have to be someone who thinks he has a proof that there can't be a god. He only has to be someone who believes that the evidence on the God question is at a similar level to the evidence on the werewolf question." [John McCarthy]
From: Larry Clapp on 11 Apr 2006 17:17
On 2006-04-11, Alan Mackenzie <acm(a)muc.de> wrote: > Sacha <no(a)address.spam> wrote on Tue, 11 Apr 2006 13:02:20 GMT: >> Lisp is supposedly one of the best languages around, it's sad we >> have to overcome the emacs barrier in order to use it effectively. > > Quite possibly, Lisp is the very best general purpose language. > Aren't there any other editors around with effective support for > Lisp? There's a group working on adding Embeddable Common Lisp (ECL) to Vim. (See http://wiki.alu.org:80/Vim_ECL.) I wouldn't go so far as to call it "effective" yet, though. -- Larry |