On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 02:29:38PM -0800, Tom wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 10:46:33PM +0100, Otto Wyss wrote:
> > > On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 18:32:47 +0200, Tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > All in all, the built-in editor of Anjuta is exactly what I'm looking Tom
> > >
> > > Try Scite, you'll
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 10:46:33PM +0100, Otto Wyss wrote:
> > On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 18:32:47 +0200, Tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > All in all, the built-in editor of Anjuta is exactly what I'm looking Tom
> >
> > Try Scite, you'll love it. Anjuta's editor is based on it.
> >
> Sorry for bein
> On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 18:32:47 +0200, Tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > All in all, the built-in editor of Anjuta is exactly what I'm looking Tom
>
> Try Scite, you'll love it. Anjuta's editor is based on it.
>
Sorry for being late but have a look at wxGuide-Editor
"http://wxguide.sourceforge.ne
Robert Storey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> OK, you can change it in Emacs too, but not so easily or elegantly. Font
> handling is something Xemacs is actually good at. I type in Chinese
> sometimes, and the Chinese fonts look terrible in Emacs, but are quite
> acceptable in Xemacs.
Ok. I've nev
On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 11:53:03AM +0800, Robert Storey wrote:
> Now I have a question. Does anyone know why in text mode, M-<
> (beginning-of-buffer) and M-> (end-of-buffer) don't work? They work fine
> in text mode in some other distros, but not in Debian or Slackware. In
> X, they always work in
On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 09:01:43 -0600
Alan Shutko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Robert Storey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > To be more specific, Xemacs has more beautiful fonts and lets you
> > change default font size.
>
> I don't see why you can't change the default font size in
> Emacs... you
Robert Storey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> To be more specific, Xemacs has more beautiful fonts and lets you
> change default font size.
I don't see why you can't change the default font size in
Emacs... you can change the default font, and with it the size. Is
XEmacs using fontconfig these day
On Sun, Oct 26, 2003 at 11:42:23AM +0800, Robert Storey wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 22:24:11 -0400
> Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Micha Feigin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, 2003-10-24 at 04:22, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> > >
> > > > Not to start a flame war,
On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 22:24:11 -0400
Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Micha Feigin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 2003-10-24 at 04:22, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> >
> > > Not to start a flame war, but I don't think XEmacs is more
> > > graphical than Emacs21 (Emacs20, yes, bu
On Thu, Oct 23, 2003 at 10:22:38PM -0400, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> Micha Feigin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 2003-10-19 at 19:43, Tom wrote:
> > > [Sunday 19 October 2003 19:09] John Hasler:
> > >
> > > > > To start with, it should be graphical, so vim, emacs and the like
> > > > >
Micha Feigin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2003-10-24 at 04:22, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
>
> > Not to start a flame war, but I don't think XEmacs is more graphical
> > than Emacs21 (Emacs20, yes, but not Emacs21).
>
> I don't think I have used emacs21 but I don't remeber, so I can't tell.
On Fri, 2003-10-24 at 04:22, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> Micha Feigin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 2003-10-19 at 19:43, Tom wrote:
> > > [Sunday 19 October 2003 19:09] John Hasler:
> > >
> > > > > To start with, it should be graphical, so vim, emacs and the like
> > > > > are no option
csj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At Sun, 19 Oct 2003 14:24:37 -0400,
> Peter S Galbraith wrote:
>
> > And CVS Emacs even uses GTK2...
>
> When will you package it? ;-)
Jérôme Marant is planing on doing that soon. It's in alioth now.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subje
Micha Feigin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 2003-10-19 at 19:43, Tom wrote:
> > [Sunday 19 October 2003 19:09] John Hasler:
> >
> > > > To start with, it should be graphical, so vim, emacs and the like
> > > > are no option to me...
> > >
> > > What do you mean by graphical? Emacs has menu
On Sun, 2003-10-19 at 19:43, Tom wrote:
> [Sunday 19 October 2003 19:09] John Hasler:
>
> > > To start with, it should be graphical, so vim, emacs and the like
> > > are no option to me...
> >
> > What do you mean by graphical? Emacs has menus, icons, cut&paste
> > with the mouse, mouse control o
On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 22:05:02 -0400,
Peter S Galbraith wrote:
>
[...]
> And as in all open source projects, it's not necessarily the
> same people working on Emacs than on the Hurd. You can't tell
> Emacs developers to stop and work on something else instead.
Unless The Hurd could be implemente
On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 20:27:57 -0500, Alan Shutko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Scott C. Linnenbringer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I'd say the emacs guys have run out of things to implement.
>
> Not really. There are a few branches working on longer-term things
> already. Also, there are
At Sun, 19 Oct 2003 14:24:37 -0400,
Peter S Galbraith wrote:
>
> Tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> > I understand the point about Emacs being as "graphical" as
> > anything else in a certain way, but I can't believe *you*
> > don't understand what I meant with "graphical". :-)
>
> I guess
Scott C. Linnenbringer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 19:33:39 -0400, Peter S Galbraith
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > True enough. But Emacs is _one_ application. You'd think they could
> > do better in terms of frequency of release.
>
> Yeah, but it's a text editor.
>
"Scott C. Linnenbringer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'd say the emacs guys have run out of things to implement.
Not really. There are a few branches working on longer-term things
already. Also, there are a number of things already implemented in
CVS that haven't been released. Why? Well, t
On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 12:09:54 -0500,
John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Tom writes:
> > To start with, it should be graphical, so vim, emacs and the like
> > are no option to me...
>
> What do you mean by graphical? Emacs has menus, icons, cut&paste with
> t
On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 19:33:39 -0400, Peter S Galbraith
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> True enough. But Emacs is _one_ application. You'd think they could
> do better in terms of frequency of release.
Yeah, but it's a text editor.
EMACS has been being developed for over 20 years or something. It'
Nicos Gollan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sunday 19 October 2003 20:24, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> > I guess I don't. Emacs _is_ graphical. And it has addons to do just
> > about anything.
>
> Yeah, it's a nice OS, but it's desparately missing a good editor :-P
> Further reference: http://ba
Carl Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 19, 2003 at 04:26:45PM -0500, Alan Shutko wrote:
>
> [about emacs]
>
> > (And yes, as someone else mentioned, the CVS version cab be built
> > against GTK. Hopefully, there will be a release someday)
>
> One could say the same about Debian
On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 18:34:55 -0400, Carl Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 19, 2003 at 04:26:45PM -0500, Alan Shutko wrote:
>
> [about emacs]
>
> > (And yes, as someone else mentioned, the CVS version cab be built
> > against GTK. Hopefully, there will be a release someday)
>
On Sun, Oct 19, 2003 at 04:26:45PM -0500, Alan Shutko wrote:
[about emacs]
> (And yes, as someone else mentioned, the CVS version cab be built
> against GTK. Hopefully, there will be a release someday)
One could say the same about Debian.
--
Carl Fink [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jab
Tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I understand the point about Emacs being as "graphical" as anything else
> in a certain way, but I can't believe *you* don't understand what I
> meant with "graphical". :-)
If mouse control, menus, tool bars, images in buffers, and being built
with a widget too
On Sun, Oct 19, 2003 at 07:43:33PM +0200, Tom wrote:
> [Sunday 19 October 2003 19:09] John Hasler:
>
> > > To start with, it should be graphical, so vim, emacs and the like
> > > are no option to me...
> >
> > What do you mean by graphical? Emacs has menus, icons, cut&paste
> > with the mouse, mo
On Sunday 19 October 2003 20:24, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> I guess I don't. Emacs _is_ graphical. And it has addons to do just
> about anything.
Yeah, it's a nice OS, but it's desparately missing a good editor :-P
Further reference: http://bash.cx/?29888
Now, don't get me wrong, I used it for
On October 19, 2003 10:43 am, Tom wrote:
> [Sunday 19 October 2003 19:09] John Hasler:
> > > To start with, it should be graphical, so vim, emacs and the like
> > > are no option to me...
> >
> > What do you mean by graphical? Emacs has menus, icons, cut&paste
> > with the mouse, mouse control of
On Sun, 2003-10-19 at 14:14, John Hasler wrote:
> Chris Anderson writes:
> > Build emacs with --with-gtk and it'll use GTK2
>
> Interesting: I didn't know that. How does emacs-gtk differ from emacs-xaw
All the menus / dialogs / scrollbars are GTK2. It looks and acts like a
GTK2 application basic
Tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [Sunday 19 October 2003 19:09] John Hasler:
>
> > > To start with, it should be graphical, so vim, emacs and the like
> > > are no option to me...
> >
> > What do you mean by graphical? Emacs has menus, icons, cut&paste
> > with the mouse, mouse control of the cu
Chris Anderson writes:
> Build emacs with --with-gtk and it'll use GTK2
Interesting: I didn't know that. How does emacs-gtk differ from emacs-xaw?
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler)
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "un
I wrote:
> What is it that people mean by a "graphical" editor?
Tom writes:
> Well... Built with widgets?
do you mean built with a particular widget set? Emacs uses Xaw.
> I can't believe *you* don't understand what I meant with "graphical".
Well, I don't.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (J
[Sunday 19 October 2003 19:09] John Hasler:
> > To start with, it should be graphical, so vim, emacs and the like
> > are no option to me...
>
> What do you mean by graphical? Emacs has menus, icons, cut&paste
> with the mouse, mouse control of the cursor, etc. What is it that
> people mean by a
On Sun, 2003-10-19 at 12:32, Tom wrote:
> Hey,
>
> It is perhaps quite a futile question, but I can't seem to find an
> editor I really like.
>
> To start with, it should be graphical, so vim, emacs and the like
> are no option to me...
You can run emacs in console or gui, depends on your prefe
Tom writes:
> To start with, it should be graphical, so vim, emacs and the like are no
> option to me...
What do you mean by graphical? Emacs has menus, icons, cut&paste with the
mouse, mouse control of the cursor, etc. What is it that people mean by a
"graphical" editor?
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL
On Sun, Oct 19, 2003 at 12:09:54PM -0500, John Hasler wrote:
> Tom writes:
> > To start with, it should be graphical, so vim, emacs and the like are no
> > option to me...
>
> What do you mean by graphical? Emacs has menus, icons, cut&paste with the
> mouse, mouse control of the cursor, etc. Wha
On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 18:32:47 +0200, Tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
All in all, the built-in editor of Anjuta is exactly what I'm looking Tom
Try Scite, you'll love it. Anjuta's editor is based on it.
Sincerely,
Jan.
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
--
To U
39 matches
Mail list logo
