Article View: net.emacs
Article #2101Re-to Re: Why emacs?
From: Hideto Tomabechi
Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1986 19:47
Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1986 19:47
56 lines
3157 bytes
3157 bytes
<<
In article <21600007@uiucuxc> dorner@uiucuxc.CSO.UIUC.EDU writes:
>
>I've used lots of editors, even wrote one once. I've been using vi for
>some time now, and like it. But I hear such fanatical comments from
>emacs users that my curiosity has been piqued. I tried it once, but when
>I found out that I had to use control characters to get around, I backed
>out in a hurry.
>
>So, emacs evangelists, convert me. Tell me why emacs is so nifty.
Others will probably go into all of emacs features, but I would
like to stress what I found important. I will start with some personal
history. I used a modified ed for close to two years and managed to get
quite a bit done. I probably could have used vi, but on a PDP 11/23 it
would have been pretty bad.
Then I started to program on VAXes and of course I wanted to use
a full screen editor. I started using vi and continued for a couple of
months. Before mastering vi, a friend introduced me to emacs. (I still
haven't mastered vi.)
The feature that really attracted me was the multiple windows.
I have a tendency to want to look at related code at the same time and I
hate to fight with printouts. The 'compile' commands which would catch
the error messages from the compiler and parse them was also a nice
feature. The automatic C indentation mode is very nice. This, however,
can be very obnoxious if it doesn't match your coding style.
I have backed off from emacs a bit now and I currently use the
jove editor. It has most of the standard emacs commands, but it doesn't
have a built-in programming language for writting functions. On systems
where I have compared it, it takes up no more space then vi and gives
you all of the features mentioned above. It is also useable on systems
without job control unlike full blown versions of emacs.
I should probably note that I do still go back to ed on
occassion when I am doing some really heavy text massaging. Usually,
this is something which should be better left to sed. I avoid using vi
whenever possible.
Bill Bogstad
bogstad@hopkins-eecs-bravo.arpa
>>
I have an exactly opposite experience. I used emacs for few years on a Unix
machine; however, I no longer use it. It is because my o/s now supports
multi-window and also that it is easier to manuever text by mouse then by
Ctls' and Metas'.
-- hideto tomabechi
tomabechi@yale.arpa
-------
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<8610091947.AA02102@Yale-Bulldog.YALE.ARPA>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!sri-spam!sri-unix!hplabs!ucbvax!YALE.ARPA!tomabechiShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!sri-spam!sri-unix!hplabs!ucbvax!YALE.ARPA!tomabechi From: tomabechi@YALE.ARPA (Hideto Tomabechi) Newsgroups: net.emacs Subject: Re-to Re: Why emacs? Message-ID: <8610091947.AA02102@Yale-Bulldog.YALE.ARPA> Date: Thu, 9-Oct-86 15:47:06 EDT Article-I.D.: Yale-Bul.8610091947.AA02102 Posted: Thu Oct 9 15:47:06 1986 Date-Received: Fri, 10-Oct-86 05:51:13 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Organization: The ARPA Internet Lines: 56