Mailing List ArchiveSupport open source code!
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]tlug: Emacs/Xemacs Question
- To: <tlug@example.com>
- Subject: tlug: Emacs/Xemacs Question
- From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <turnbull@example.com>
- Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 15:50:34 +0900 (JST)
- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
- In-Reply-To: <001101bfc737$e9b75c60$7107a2d0@example.com>
- References: <001101bfc737$e9b75c60$7107a2d0@example.com>
- Reply-To: tlug@example.com
- Sender: owner-tlug
>>>>> "k0n" == k0n <halimaw@example.com> writes: k0n> one big question for a new nix user.. what da hell does k0n> Emacs do? Everything. If your box can do it, Emacs can tell the box to do it. This is not always a good idea; other programming languages are often prettier or more efficient. Primarily it's a text editor. It can do everything that Perl can do, and these days it's hardly any bigger ;-) But it's much better at displaying things while it's editing. >>>>> "g" == <grendel@example.com> writes: g> It serves a similar purpose to that filled by vi I g> believe. Uh-uh. If you like Emacs, you can substitute it for vi, but there's no reason to do so if vi's functionality is satisfactory. The purpose of Emacs is to make all the power of a modern editor combined with a general-purpose scripting language available in your command environment. >>>>> "Scott" == Scott M Stone <sstone@example.com> writes: Scott> So basically the gist is that Xemacs is more bizarre Scott> (bazaar?) and more abstract. So it's the Picasso of Scott> Editors, then :) Into the .sig with you! Scott> Seriously, though, all kidding aside, XEmacs is clearly Scott> better from a functionality perspective. From a disk space Scott> perspective, they're both fricking huge, with Xemacs being Scott> slightly more so than its RMS-consorting counterpart. I have at least one fully-functional XEmacs installation[1] in under 20 MB, including full info docs and all the PNGs of developers in xemacs/etc/photos (I should rm those, it's a tty-only box ;-). XEmacs at least gives you that choice. But users expect it to come with everything, so that's the standard distribution. Footnotes: [1] Not including temacs, so I can't redump. -- University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences Tel/fax: +81 (298) 53-5091 _________________ _________________ _________________ _________________ What are those straight lines? "XEmacs (the Picasso of Editors!) rules." -------------------------------------------------------------------- Next Nomikai Meeting: June 16 (Fri), 19:00 Tengu TokyoEkiMae Next Technical Meeting: July 8 (Sat) 13:30 Topic: TBA -------------------------------------------------------------------- more info: http://www.tlug.gr.jp Sponsor: Global Online Japan
- References:
- tlug: Emacs/Xemacs Question
- From: "k0n" <halimaw@example.com>
Home | Main Index | Thread Index
- Prev by Date: Re: tlug: Win-emacs Japanese input method?
- Next by Date: Re: tlug: Emacs/Xemacs Question
- Prev by thread: Re: tlug: Emacs/Xemacs Question
- Next by thread: tlug: 7th ITT Forum - May 30 *Guest Speaker*
- Index(es):
Home Page Mailing List Linux and Japan TLUG Members Links