On 28 Aug 2000, Paul Huygen wrote: > USM Bish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > No, I'm actually looking for a word processor for small time > > jobs like letters and other odd things that I push out on my > > DMP. This type of odd jobs actually occupies 60% of my time. > > I am getting tired of switching to "X" for such small stuff. > > I have to write many small letters too. However, contrary to general > opinions, I think that (Emacs and) LaTeX provides an at least as > efficient way to type letters than standard word processors or editors > do. The trick is, to make a style file > (e.g. mypersonalletterstyle.cls) that builds the letter including > header, head items, foot items, date, signature etc, and to make a > keyboard macro for the editor of choice that generates the following > frame for the letter, e.g.: > > \documentclass{mypersonalletterstyle} > \begin{document} > \begin{letter}{*name and address of adressee*} > > *text of the letter here* > > \closing{*closing sentence here*} > \end{letter} > \end{document} > > Then, all you have to do to create a beautyful letter, is 1) activate > the keyboard macro to generate the letter frame, 2) replace the parts > between the asterixes by the actual texts and 3) LaTeX and print > the letter. > > Paul Huygen >
I agree; I've done exactly this in vim. Another possibility is to use pr. You can set up an alias to produce the format you like; I have: alias pr="pr -f -l 57 -o 5" I also agree that dependence on word processors is unnecessary. When I used DOS I had a WP I liked a lot called Protext. I missed it at first in Linux (because it won't run in dosemu). However, now I used vim (with latex when necesssary) and can reproduce all the features I used to like in Protext, plus some others. Anthony -- Anthony Campbell - running Linux Debian 2.2 (Windows-free zone) Book Reviews: http://www.cix.co.uk/~acampbell/bookreviews/ Skeptical articles: http://www.cix.co.uk/~acampbell/freethinker/ "To be forced by desire into any unwarrantable belief is a calamity." I.A. Richards