>From your various responses you seem to be advocating using a shallow
set of functionality that is easily translatable across most
applications, so you can switch to a new one without much effort
rewiring muscle-memory, etc. That's the way you like to work, and
that's fine.
Myself, and other people who appreciate Emacs, would rather have a very
deep, powerful set of functionality and learn to take full advantage of
it. Yes, it would be harder for me to move to a new application for
full-time work (although it is, after all, not rocket science to switch
tools). However, for this precise reason I use a tool which is free
software, not proprietary, and which has already been in use for 20+
years and has been ported to more platforms than any of the tools you
have mentioned on this thread so far. I'm quite confident in saying
that as long as I want to use it, Emacs will be available to me.
Therefore the ONLY reason to switch is if something better comes
along... and if something better comes along it will be WORTH the effort
of switching, and so I'll make the effort.
%% Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Of course! But, I'm talking about COMMON functions such as
>> selecting regions of text, copying it to the clipboard, pasting it,
>> when you search a text, jump to the top of the line, and copy
>> the line in the mail summary window as when you search, jump,
>> and copy a part of your source code in a text-editing window.
> Yes, and handy keys those are. *points to end, home, pgup, pgdn,
> etc*
This definition of "common functions" is far too limited. I also
consider all of the following to be very basic functionality:
* beginning/end of file
* forward/backward by word
* forward/backward by sentence
* forward/backward by paragraph
* search forward/backward
* search forward/backward again (using the same string)
* query/replace
* query/replace again (using the same strings)
* undo (multiple levels)/redo (multiple levels)
* paste previous cut (that is, not the most recent but the one before
that, or the one before _that_, etc.--i.e. a selection list)
>> Exactly. And that small percentage is what you use most
>> frequently in your daily life. At least this is true for me.
sl> Which doesn't imply that one should program everything inside a
sl> text editor. The proper way would be to provide that
sl> functionality globally by a controlling program or, failing that,
sl> community standards.
Emacs has a client/server capability so there's no reason that any
reasonably configurable mail/news/whatever tool couldn't be set up to
quickly and seamlessly invoke Emacs to compose messages.
Here's the thing though: I need all of those functions when I'm READING
mail, too, not just writing it. It's quite liberating to realize that
the mail message you're reading is just another buffer, and you can go
there, search through it, move around, select text, copy several
selections, go somewhere else, paste them, etc. etc. using the exact
same commands as you would for any other editing job.
Sure, it would be great if there were community standards that covered
editing capabilities in-depth, but in fact the only standards we have
are very basic: as you say, page up/down, home/end, arrow keys, maybe
a few others.
As for a controlling program, things like screen can only get you very
limited integration. That's not good enough: I want the full power of
the editor available in ALL areas where it might be useful.
Your posts indicate you feel that reading and editing are quite
unrelated tasks, and so should be handled by different tools and if
their interfaces are different that's perfectly reasonable. I don't
agree with that: I think they have far more in common than they are
different, and I prefer to use the same interface when performing common
operations.
sl> In fact when confronted with a lack of options I can make do with
sl> what is available.
And... so? Are you trying to imply that Emacs users _can't_ do that?
There's nothing about using Emacs that makes you incapable of using
other editors. I daresay most Emacs users do use other editors for some
tasks (personally I use vi almost exclusively when I'm su'd to root, for
example).
However, arguing about what to do when you don't have any choices is a
pointless conversation on its face. The only interesting conversation
is what you use when you have options.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul D. Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> HASMAT--HA Software Mthds & Tools
"Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These are my opinions--Nortel takes no responsibility for them.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
