Re: A83: OT: emacs...
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: A83: OT: emacs...
On Thu, 4 Nov 1999, Olle Hedman wrote:
>
> David Phillips wrote:
> > Heh, I'll clarify before I send with one word: intuitive. And Emacs sure as
> > heck isn't.
>
> I must agree there.. Stranger keyboardcommands is still to be found :)
I personally think that vi's keyboard commands are stranger... I /still/
don't know how quit from it besides going to another terminal and kill
-9'ing it. But hey, I'm an emacs user... I'm biased. Actually, I use
MicroEmacs... it's a really small (200k) program which is yet a really
easy to use, functionful (doesn't have eliza, but then who cares :) text
editor.
> quite nice, when you get used to it though.
> (and cut and paste and such, isnt harder in emacs than in dos edit. C-space to
> set a mark, move to end of block (hold in shift and move to end of block in
> dos), C-w to cut (C-x in dos) and C-y to paste (C-v in dos))
> I can't see why one is harder then the other..
> And you do have menues in emacs to, but they are a bit harder to navigate then
> the dos ones, and not as inituative.
> It is very easy to get lost in the buffers in emacs :) (where did my text go??)
> I have cursed it a lot of times. I was before a emacs-hater, but now when I have
> used it in school a bit, I am beginning to like it.. (yikes :))
> If you want intuitive, you can use xemacs.
Daniel Church | "War doesn't determine who is right-
___---^---___ | only who is left."
dchurch@mbhs.edu | -anonymous
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GCS/M/S/MU>AT d-(+)(x) s++:- a16@ C++(+++)>++++$ UL++++ P+ L+++(++)>++++
E W+>++ N+ o? K? w(---) !O !M(--) V? PS+(++) PE(--) Y? !PGP>+ t+ 5 X()+
R>+ tv+() b+(++)>+++ DI++>++++ D++ G+>++ e-(*)>++ h!>>-(---) r+>++ y>+
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Follow-Ups:
References: