|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Pre-testing Emacs 22

Some projects produce major releases more quickly than others, but, even when placed at the slow end of the scale, GNU Emacs is exceptional. Current Emacs users are running version 21, first released on October 22, 2001. Occasional minor releases have happened since, but, for all practical purposes, Emacs has stood still for the last five years.

At least, the officially-released version of Emacs has stood still. Meanwhile, the development community has been busy working toward Emacs 22. Richard Stallman - who still keeps a firm hand on the direction of Emacs development - has never been inclined to give dates for upcoming software releases. So, after five years, we still don't know when Emacs 22 might be released, but we do know that it is getting closer: the first pre-test release of GNU Emacs 22 is, at long last, available. The project has reached the point where the desired features are in place and stabilization is an increasingly high priority.

Your editor grabbed the pre-test release, and has been working with it for a couple of days - it is being used to type this article. At first blush, the new version of Emacs does not look all that much different. The windows look the same, most of the keystrokes are the same, and your editor has not yet encountered any elisp code which fails to work properly - even the brutal elisp hacks which connect Emacs to the LWN article database work without changes. The Emacs developers have seemingly done a good job of maintaining compatibility over five years of development.

The new GNU Emacs does feel a little faster and more responsive, somehow. There are also various little things one notices over time. For example, a command to open a new file generates a prompt like this:

[modeline]

The prompt includes the directory where the file is expected to be found. Emacs has always allowed the user to simply type a new path, starting with "/" or "~"; the new version, however, makes the resulting action (ignoring the previous path in the prompt) clear:

[modeline]

It's little things like this which make an interface more pleasant and easy to use. On the other hand, the new policy of requiring a keystroke to get past the "one component of the GNU/Linux operating system" screen is obnoxious - but this behavior can be disabled.

Of course, there's plenty of bigger things in this new release, once one goes looking. Support for internationalization and encodings has been significantly improved. Also improved is window system support: Emacs now understands mouse wheels without special instructions and will do the right thing when files are "dropped" into it. One can turn on "focus follows mouse" behavior even within Emacs frames. The addition of an IRC client would have been useful, but this is Emacs, so they added two different ones. There is a new "calc" mode which is truly scary in the things it can do. "Org mode" is a Tomboy-like notes-taking application, but with an order of magnitude more features. There is a built-in spreadsheet with all the usual features and some unusual ones - like the ability to enter cell formulas in Lisp. Flymake mode performs on-the-fly syntax checking of source code as it is being entered. There is a new, fancier printing mechanism built into the editor. And so on. The current NEWS file gives a lengthy overview of the changes - though somehow it omits the important addition of a Tetris game.

When LWN first posted the pre-test announcement, the result was an immediate mini-flamewar on the merits of Emacs relative to vi. One can only expect that, as the Emacs 22 release gets closer and draws more attention, we will see more of this sort of debate. Your editor must confess that he has never quite understood what motivates these battles; one person's choice of editor should not really be a problem for somebody else.

More to the point, though, your editor is one of those rare, strange people who actually uses both editors over the course of a normal day. They both have their strengths and weaknesses, and each fits your editor's working style at different times.

  • vi is fast, in a number of ways. It starts quickly, which is nice when a quick job needs to be done. It is likely to be the most keystroke-efficient editor around, especially once one gets the hang of how the movement and editing commands combine. Files can be edited in vi using relatively straightforward keys and no strange modifier combinations.

    On the other hand, vi has an inherently modal interface, which is considered to be bad human factors in general and which trips up every user sooner or later. It is deeply line-oriented at its core, though some more recent versions have done a better job of hiding that fact. And vi simply lacks a number of more advanced features; it was never meant to contain mail clients, RSS readers, calendars, or psychoanalysis programs. Recent work to add some of these features to vi feel misplaced, like putting a trailer hitch onto a two-seater sports car.

  • Emacs is an interactive user interface development environment which happens to be very good at editing text. Many years of effort have gone into using this environment to develop editing tools of great power. Emacs has long had a high level of integration with tools like compilers, debuggers, text formatters, etc. which still does not exist in vi. There can be great joy in having a full editor environment available when dealing with mail or debugging a program. Emacs, when well configured and understood, can be a great productivity aid.

    But, then, Emacs is a vast monster of a program - though it has been rapidly out-bloated by current desktop tools. Somebody who has been an expert Emacs user for many years will still only know a fraction of its capabilities; it can be frustrating to know that, somewhere in there, lurks just the feature needed to get a job done - but to not be able to find it. The wrong key sequence can occasionally lead to hallucinogenic results, to the point that there is a special command ("view-lossage") to answer those "how the hell did I make it do that?" questions. Even some relatively trivial customizations require typing in Lisp code, which, for some strange reason, not everybody wants to learn how to do.

    There is also an entire branch in the physical therapy field dedicated to the treatment of little-finger injuries caused by excessive Emacs use.

The end result of all the above is that your editor tends to use Emacs for most day-to-day work, including the editing of articles and source code. When working as root and editing system configuration files, however, he tends to switch to vi. And, seeing advantages in both tools, your editor sees no real reason for intense discussions about which is better.

Such discussions will certainly come about, however, as the Emacs development cycle heads toward its conclusion. The new release seems unlikely to tempt many vi users to make a switch, but Emacs users will have something to celebrate. After all this time, there will be a significant update for this venerable tool (the first thing released by the GNU project). Just don't ask RMS when to expect it.


to post comments

Pre-testing Emacs 22

Posted Nov 2, 2006 2:39 UTC (Thu) by lordsutch (guest, #53) [Link] (1 responses)

On the other hand, the new policy of requiring a keystroke to get past the "one component of the GNU/Linux operating system" screen is obnoxious - but this behavior can be disabled.
This is probably the #1 reason why my Emacs alternative still points to Emacs 21... so, how do I disable the nag screen?

Startup screen

Posted Nov 2, 2006 3:01 UTC (Thu) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link]

From the NEWS file:

** Emacs now displays a splash screen by default even if command-line arguments were given. The new command-line option --no-splash disables the splash screen; see also the variable `inhibit-startup-message' (which is also aliased as `inhibit-splash-screen').

I have (setq inhibit-startup-message t) in my .emacs.

Pre-testing Emacs 22

Posted Nov 2, 2006 5:44 UTC (Thu) by flewellyn (subscriber, #5047) [Link] (4 responses)

The current NEWS file gives a lengthy overview of the changes - though somehow it omits the important addition of a Tetris game.

At a guess, I'd say that's because it's not new to Emacs 22. I have played it in Emacs 21, you see. So they wouldn't mention a feature that isn't new.

Tetris trademark

Posted Nov 2, 2006 6:35 UTC (Thu) by dmarti (subscriber, #11625) [Link]

Tetris® is a trademark -- isn't it? At least one non-licensed implementation has gotten a cease and desist letter.

Tetris

Posted Nov 2, 2006 14:24 UTC (Thu) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link] (2 responses)

Ah...the version of emacs I work with most was packaged by a distributor with a well-known aversion to Tetris-like games. Should have thought of that. Sure enough, on another box running a different distribution, Tetris is present in emacs 21. The v22 version looks nicer though...

Tetris

Posted Nov 2, 2006 15:47 UTC (Thu) by flewellyn (subscriber, #5047) [Link] (1 responses)

Why should a distributor be able to decide what features your programs have, based on his or her personal preferences? Oi.

This, obviously, is why I'm a Gentoo user.

Tetris

Posted Nov 2, 2006 18:55 UTC (Thu) by jzbiciak (guest, #5246) [Link]

I think it's more like removing features based on their perceived ability to bring unwanted lawsuits, regardless of the merit of those lawsuits.

Switching to Emacs

Posted Nov 2, 2006 7:00 UTC (Thu) by jhs (guest, #12429) [Link] (3 responses)

The new release seems unlikely to tempt many vi users to make a switch

I don't know about that. For my own part, when I started learning about Linux and Unix, I learned Emacs. At one point, I switched to vim and I use it heavily now. However, I still long for the integrated environments, especially for development. I remember how Emacs had a deeper understanding of my source code, and it made writing code less tedious. I have tried Eclipse and NetBeans, but I don't like their heavy graphical nature.

Maybe it's time I take a look at Emacs again.

Switching to Emacs

Posted Nov 2, 2006 7:10 UTC (Thu) by ncm (guest, #165) [Link]

I don't understand the flame wars either. I tried out Gvim this month, but have gone back to Emacs running in viper-mode.

"Viper-mode: for the worst of both worlds!"

Switching to Emacs

Posted Nov 3, 2006 16:47 UTC (Fri) by vonbrand (subscriber, #4458) [Link] (1 responses)

Perhaps you should give XEmacs a try...

Switching to Emacs

Posted Nov 5, 2006 0:43 UTC (Sun) by ronaldcole (guest, #1462) [Link]

I would second this. XEmacs just handles X better than vanilla Emacs.

the magic of editors...

Posted Nov 2, 2006 7:13 UTC (Thu) by nettings (subscriber, #429) [Link]

it's funny to see the special vi/emacs magic at work here :)
notice how even the lwn editor cannot but engage in a discussion about vi even though the article's topic is emacs.
let that be a small comfort to all those who have been dragged into vi/emacs flamewars against their will by natural forces they cannot control ;)

Emacs vs VI

Posted Nov 2, 2006 7:51 UTC (Thu) by ldo (guest, #40946) [Link] (8 responses)

When I first started using UNIX systems with some frequency (from 1985 onwards), I stuck with vi, because it was the only full-screen text editor that I could be pretty sure would be available on whatever UNIX system I might find myself on. I never liked it--not only did I not like the insert-versus-command-mode dichotomy, but it seems to be the only text editor that completely fails to grasp the concept that the insertion point lies between characters, not on a character.

Nowadays, it's a rare *nix system that doesn't include Emacs. So I've decided to learn it. Old habits die hard, but I feel I'm making progress. I was intrigued to read our esteemed Editor admitting that he still uses vi for editing system config files--I often do that too. But frankly I don't notice much difference in startup speed between the two. So I don't see any reason in principle not to use Emacs as root and for editing system configs.

Of course, when my fingers forget which one they're driving, much hilarity ensues... :)

Difference in startup speed.

Posted Nov 2, 2006 13:01 UTC (Thu) by Max.Hyre (subscriber, #1054) [Link] (6 responses)

You start emacs more than once per login?

Difference in startup speed.

Posted Nov 2, 2006 13:39 UTC (Thu) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link] (5 responses)

It's XEmacs that has the slower startup, because its package manager must recurse over all package directories to find and load all auto-autoloads files. Emacs is quite nippy by comparison.

I consider the three-second wait to be *more* than worth it for the increased flexibility that the package-management system brings.

Difference in startup speed.

Posted Nov 2, 2006 15:37 UTC (Thu) by pflugstad (subscriber, #224) [Link] (4 responses)

Or use Jed (http://www.jedsoft.org/jed/) and get vi startup speed with many emacs features. It's typically one of the first things I install on any system I'm administering.

Difference in startup speed.

Posted Nov 2, 2006 19:30 UTC (Thu) by oak (guest, #2786) [Link]

And like any self-respecting programmer's text editor, Jed is
programmable (with Slang). I don't understand how Linus can
use an editor (microemacs) that isn't programmable... :-)

I use Vi, Emacs and some GUI text editors in addition to Jed.
Long ago my original reason for starting using Emacs (on 8 Mhz
/ 4MB machine) was its regex-replace feature (at that time
my main text editor was Mutt (programming language) editor).

QEmacs -- another fast emacs alternative

Posted Nov 6, 2006 10:37 UTC (Mon) by pink18 (guest, #32445) [Link]

49KB. The killer feature for me, compared to other clones, is that vertical split mode works (out of the box).

http://fabrice.bellard.free.fr/qemacs/

Difference in startup speed.

Posted Nov 9, 2006 9:59 UTC (Thu) by anandsr21 (guest, #28562) [Link] (1 responses)

The fact that you have to install it, is no good. The reason I use Vi for quick editing is because I can depend on it to be there. If I have to work substantially more then I will think of installing something, and in this case why not go with the real thing.

Difference in startup speed.

Posted Nov 14, 2006 21:00 UTC (Tue) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

But you have to install *everything* on a Linux box, or how does it get
there? It's not as if we have a `core' like the BSDs.

(In any case the argument is nearly-inverted on Solaris boxes, which tend
to get XEmacs as a matter of course on development platforms because Sun's
flagship development environment has XEmacs integration.)

Emacs vs VI

Posted Nov 2, 2006 13:38 UTC (Thu) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

I used to use vi for editing config files, until I discovered Kai Grossjohann's tramp: sort of like ange-ftp or efs, except that it can transfer files via ftp, scp, sftp, telnet, rsh, raw shell (using uudecode, shell script, or a perl program transferred across the line), over a su (!), and even tunnelled across multiple-hop connections (`I have to ssh in there and then telnet there and then su to *that* user before I can edit anything').

So now I can edit everything, no matter who owns it, in the same editor.

Cool stuff

Posted Nov 2, 2006 8:01 UTC (Thu) by tnoo (subscriber, #20427) [Link] (1 responses)

Since four year I am using emacs 22.*, compiling from CVS every week or
so. Not only was I impressed how stable it was, but how fast the
developers -- most notably RMS -- come up with fixes for bugs or
inconveniences.

Things to check out:

o ido-mode lets you find files an buffers by typing a fraction of the
name (ido-mode t)

o focus follows mouse (setq mouse-autoselect-window t)

o parentheses matching (blink-matching-paren-on-screen t)

o working with compressed files (auto-compression-mode 1)

o open the filename in the buffer (autoload 'find-file-at-point "ffap"
nil t)

o editing of remote files with Tramp mode which is now included

and of course external power tools like planner/muse, and the vm mailer.

tnoo

Cool stuff

Posted Nov 2, 2006 19:26 UTC (Thu) by rfrancoise (subscriber, #15508) [Link]

Note: auto-compression-mode is enabled by default in Emacs 22.

Unicode?

Posted Nov 2, 2006 10:28 UTC (Thu) by mmarkov (guest, #4978) [Link] (2 responses)

How well does it support Unicode? I have been a XEmacs user for quite a while but XEmacs Unicode support is still incomplete/in-development/etc. If the most recent Emacs supports Unicode completely, I may be tempted to switch.

Unicode?

Posted Nov 2, 2006 13:40 UTC (Thu) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

Unicode support works quite well in XEmacs-21.5, which is now stabilizing and perfectly usable for day-to-day work (just don't turn on --enable-newgc yet, it's got a big leak in it).

Unicode?

Posted Nov 2, 2006 19:22 UTC (Thu) by liljencrantz (guest, #28458) [Link]

I am by no means an advanced Unicode (or emacs) user, but I've had no problems with UTF-8 in emacs 21. It's easy to convert a file to a different character set, copy-and-paste between buffers with different character sets work, and emacs shouts at me if I try to save a file in a character set that doesn't have mappings for all the characters in the buffer, etc.

The only major annoyance I've found is that double wide Unicode characters, e.g. Kanji, don't always work properly when running emacs in terminal (non-graphical) mode.

Can still go better...

Posted Nov 2, 2006 11:21 UTC (Thu) by phgrenet (guest, #5979) [Link] (5 responses)

Looks like it Emacs still doesn't support anti-alias fonts like Bitstream Vera fonts... I love Emacs but this is really a shame.

I use to use Emacs very intensively for years but not anymore. I discovered Eclipse a few years ago and now use it for almost everything related to programming. Eclipse shines for Java programming (it is light-years ahead of Emacs for this) and is getting increasingly good for C++ and other languages like Python. Moreover, Eclipse is designed ot be extensible with the same spirit as Emacs, i.e. everyone can customize it to make its own Eclipse. Eclipse is the new Emacs... Too bad it is not written in Lisp.

Can still go better...

Posted Nov 2, 2006 13:41 UTC (Thu) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

(Aside: the development release of XEmacs supports Xft and anti-aliased fonts. The improvement in appearance from that one change alone is quite remarkable.)

Can still go better...

Posted Nov 2, 2006 16:54 UTC (Thu) by charris (guest, #13263) [Link] (1 responses)

Looks like it Emacs still doesn't support anti-alias fonts like Bitstream Vera fonts... I love Emacs but this is really a shame.

That is the one single reason that prompted me to switch to gvim after using emacs for several years. I *hates* ugly fonts.

Can still go better...

Posted Nov 4, 2006 13:29 UTC (Sat) by akapoor (guest, #25351) [Link]

Check out the _latest_ emacs incarnation i.e. with the emacs-unicode-2 branch. It supports anti-aliased-fonts. More info is available here:

http://www.emacswiki.org/cgi-bin/wiki/XftGnuEmacs

Can still go better...

Posted Nov 2, 2006 22:16 UTC (Thu) by captrb (guest, #2291) [Link] (1 responses)

I also use Eclipse a great deal, but I *must* use emacs for serious source editing. I hit F5 (refresh files) a thousand times a day. There was a plugin that connected Emacs to Eclipse using beanshell and JDE, but it is not compatible with the latest Eclipse.

About the fonts, I started using JMK fonts in Emacs and though they are not anti-aliased, they did improve the appearance considerably.

alias emacs='emacs-snapshot-gtk -fn -jmk-neep-medium-r-normal-*-*-140-*-*-c-*-iso8859-15 -bg white -fg black'

p.s. i always edit my .emacs using VIM :-)

Can still go better...

Posted Nov 3, 2006 5:07 UTC (Fri) by RelentlessWeevilHowl (guest, #5682) [Link]

> About the fonts, I started using JMK fonts in Emacs and though they are not
> anti-aliased, they did improve the appearance considerably.

Note that Debian's xfonts-jmk package includes ISO-10646-1 variants for 6x13, 8x15 and 10x20. This was done by glomming the similarly sized ISO-10646-1 "misc" fonts onto the original definitions. (The changelog also mentions some other tweaks.)

``- but this behavior can be disabled.''

Posted Nov 2, 2006 12:58 UTC (Thu) by Max.Hyre (subscriber, #1054) [Link]

The article must be written for newbies who've never even heard of emacs. :-)

Pre-testing Emacs 22

Posted Nov 2, 2006 14:32 UTC (Thu) by rfunk (subscriber, #4054) [Link] (1 responses)

When the Emacs 22 test release was announced, I tried the Debian package
of emacs-snapshot-gtk. I quickly discovered that something in the
menu-nesting code makes emacs crash, so I abandonded further testing for
now.

However, it did get me taking another look at GNU Emacs after using
Xemacs for a few years. And I've discovered that GNU Emacs 21 (with
sufficient customization/configuration) works better for me than XEmacs
21, so I've switched back to GNU.

Oh, and I'm happy to see that I have the same emacs vs. vi habits as our
esteemed editor. Though I sometimes like to use zile on servers to get a
bit of the emacs experience without losing the speed of vi.

Pre-testing Emacs 22

Posted Nov 2, 2006 15:27 UTC (Thu) by cyd (guest, #4153) [Link]

> I quickly discovered that something in the menu-nesting code makes emacs
> crash, so I abandonded further testing for now.

If you don't report the bug, it won't be fixed when you come back to it later. Please report the bug (to the Emacs devs, not to LWN.net).

Pre-testing Emacs 22

Posted Nov 2, 2006 15:50 UTC (Thu) by flewellyn (subscriber, #5047) [Link] (3 responses)

As someone who has written term papers in both Vim and Emacs, I like them both. I find my usage patterns similar to our editor's: vim for small jobs, Emacs for day to day coding.

Pre-testing Emacs 22

Posted Nov 2, 2006 23:04 UTC (Thu) by goeran (subscriber, #151) [Link] (2 responses)

That makes at least three of us! Maybe we could start a club! :-)

Pre-testing Emacs 22

Posted Nov 3, 2006 19:40 UTC (Fri) by vmole (guest, #111) [Link] (1 responses)

Make it 4 of us -- that's more than a club, that's a movement!

Pre-testing Emacs 22

Posted Nov 9, 2006 10:21 UTC (Thu) by anandsr21 (guest, #28562) [Link]

I guess most Emacs users use Vi also for quick editing, or where Emacs does not exist. I should learn Tramp though, maybe I will be able to avoid using Vi in most places.

I like both kinds of editor & Emacs Pinky Solutions

Posted Nov 2, 2006 18:55 UTC (Thu) by shapr (subscriber, #9077) [Link] (2 responses)

I'm also a user of both kinds of editor, though I mostly live in xemacs and use tramp for some vim tasks.

Also, there's a solution to the emacs pinky problem: Don't use fingers for chording! (I express it as, "I am not a koala.")

I own a kinesis contoured keyboard and I remapped it such that all modifier keys are under my thumbs. I also remapped home & pgup -> Super and End & PgDn -> Hyper for extra emacs modifier goodness.

My ~/.emacs ends up including about 1500 lines of elisp some of which I've written myself and some downloaded from emacswiki.org and other good sources. (Jef Raskin's Humane Interface ideas are great, see DiskKey, KillKey, etc)

I like both kinds of editor & Emacs Pinky Solutions

Posted Nov 3, 2006 0:47 UTC (Fri) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link] (1 responses)

Nifty keymap, and as a Maltron user I see the point of it: but, um, how do
you use the cursor keys, pgup, pgdown, and so on? I don't see any sign
that you've remapped *them* anywhere else...

I like both kinds of editor & Emacs Pinky Solutions

Posted Nov 15, 2006 16:28 UTC (Wed) by shapr (subscriber, #9077) [Link]

I haven't touched the arrow keys, and I use C-v and M-v in place of pgup and pgdn. The only cases where I really miss pgup and pgdn are when I'm using aptitude.

Any suggestions for improving this keymap?

Pre-testing Emacs 22

Posted Nov 2, 2006 19:15 UTC (Thu) by N0NB (guest, #3407) [Link] (4 responses)

I'm not a professional developer although I do a bit of coding from time to time. Mostly I am a hobbyist/home user and have excised both Emacs and vi and friends from my systems.

For quick editing of config files and such I use Midnight Commander. Yes, it's editor is clunky, but no worse than vi, plus it does feature syntax highlighting on recognized file types.

For any other work I use FTE which fits my approach to editing very well. These are among the first two apps that I install. No mode switching, no protheletizing, just results.

While Emacs 22 sounds impressive, I already run KDE, so I don't need another DE. Secondly, I want an editor that edits without having to remember modes, allows the use of the mouse or keyboard to select text, and supports the basic Wordstar keystrokes for movement and text operations. I get that with FTE.

Pre-testing Emacs 22

Posted Nov 3, 2006 0:50 UTC (Fri) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link] (2 responses)

You also get all the things you asked about with Emacs (with, I think,
brief-mode).

You don't have to `remember' modes: for the most part they fly into
existence when you need them (make-mode when you load a makefile, cc-mode
when you load C code, info-mode when you read info, various gnus modes
when you're reading news).

And, um, I can't imagine what made you think that KDE and Emacs are in any
way incompatible. Emacs is an *editor*: you can use it as an editor and
use the desktop's features for e.g. terminal emulators, or live in it and
hardly ever venture out, it's up to you. (I do both: at work I live
entirely in XEmacs and hardly ever look at anything else: at home I use
konsoles and graphical media viewers and RSS aggregators and the like.)

Pre-testing Emacs 22

Posted Nov 3, 2006 4:31 UTC (Fri) by N0NB (guest, #3407) [Link] (1 responses)

My point wasn't that KDE and Emacs are incompatible. I was making an obscure point in reference to the article's mention that Version 22 includes *two* IRC clients along with a spreadsheet to go with the existing mail and news and other functions. Thus my point about already having one DE that I use and not needing another.

Sheesh! Some of you guys take all of the fun out of posting...

But, I march to the beat of my own drummer. Which is why I switched to Linux full time long before there were any thoughts of IPOs or companies releasing some proprietary program as "open source". I won't be joining the vi or Emacs camps anytime soon (yes, I've tried each in the past, I just wish I could avoid vi as successfully as I can avoid Emacs) as I have found what works best for me.

The great thing about Free Software is that one need not live in a straight jacket.

Pre-testing Emacs 22

Posted Nov 14, 2006 20:56 UTC (Tue) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

Aha.

(And if you want to live in a straitjacket, Emacs has a psychiatrist. It's
stuffed with dead useful features like that. A minesweeper game, too, and
a window manager. Just what you want in your text editor: if it crashes X
goes down with it!)

Pre-testing Emacs 22

Posted Nov 3, 2006 2:52 UTC (Fri) by cyd (guest, #4153) [Link]

In Emacs, you can do M-x wordstar-mode RET. This turns on wordstar-like key bindings.

vi vs emacs flamewars

Posted Nov 3, 2006 4:36 UTC (Fri) by mikov (guest, #33179) [Link] (3 responses)

One point that our esteemed editor may be missing in his observation on
the vi vs Emacs flame wars, is that there is a non-insignificant number of
people who dislike both vi and Emacs :-) (deploying anti-flame
shielding...) This is virtually anybody who did not learn to program under
Unix.

For years now I have been deliberately forcing myself to use vim for
absolutely every task which doesn't require major editing - e.g.
configurations, small scripts, etc. I have to admit it still makes me want
to scream and break my keyboard. It also made adopt the terrible habit of
constantly and needlessly hitting Esc even when I am using other editors.

Subjectively Emacs does look a lore more workable, but the fact remains
that to me both Emacs and Vi have that 70-s feel to them.

Here is a trivial feature that, as far as I can tell, they are both
missing: marking text with shift+arrows. The logic tells me
that using control combinations may be more ergonomic than using the
arrows, but I doubt I will ever be able to stop using them ... I am
spoiled for ever - subjectively the best editor I ever used was Microsoft
Visual C 4. (Note that it isn't about the GUI - I actually prefer to run
an editor in a text terminal)



vi vs emacs flamewars

Posted Nov 3, 2006 5:01 UTC (Fri) by RelentlessWeevilHowl (guest, #5682) [Link] (2 responses)

> Here is a trivial feature that, as far as I can tell, they are both
> missing: marking text with shift+arrows.

You can get that from CUA mode for Emacs: http://www.cua.dk/cua.el

vi vs emacs flamewars

Posted Nov 3, 2006 16:53 UTC (Fri) by cyd (guest, #4153) [Link]

It's also included by default in Emacs 22: M-x cua-mode RET or Options->C-x/C-c/C-v cut and paste (CUA)

vi vs emacs flamewars

Posted Nov 3, 2006 19:22 UTC (Fri) by mikov (guest, #33179) [Link]

It works! You may have just created one more Emacs fan ! :-)


VIPER == best of both worlds

Posted Nov 3, 2006 19:27 UTC (Fri) by zooko (guest, #2589) [Link]

Dear Our Editor:

Give VIPER mode a try. It'll prevent you from joining the ranks of Emacs users (including many of the Emacs developers) who have permanently crippled hands from chording, and it'll let you basically get the best of both worlds.

Emacs, Vi, and Sodomy

Posted Nov 3, 2006 20:05 UTC (Fri) by giraffedata (guest, #1954) [Link]

Your editor must confess that he has never quite understood what motivates these battles; one person's choice of editor should not really be a problem for somebody else.

Then he must be truly mystified by the battles over laws against sodomy and recreational drug use.

Emacs speed

Posted Nov 3, 2006 20:13 UTC (Fri) by giraffedata (guest, #1954) [Link]

The new GNU Emacs does feel a little faster and more responsive, somehow.

That's great to hear. The last two times I upgraded (to 20 and to 21), I had to abandon the new release because it was too slow. I don't ask for much -- just that the scrolling keep up with my keyboard repeat (20/second). I eventually got a faster CPU and dumped Emacs 19, but the system where I do much of my editing still can't handle 21.

I've always wondered what additional work Emacs was doing for me in scrolling down one line in the more advanced version -- it couldn't be anything worth buying a new computer over. And I wonder if I can turn it off.

Pre-testing Emacs 22

Posted Nov 4, 2006 13:40 UTC (Sat) by akapoor (guest, #25351) [Link]

No mention of the fact that emacs now can take lisp-expressions as part of M-x {query}-replace-regex (this alone might be the single most important reason for upgrade).

Pre-testing Emacs 22

Posted Nov 28, 2006 19:33 UTC (Tue) by beoba (guest, #16942) [Link]

Note to author: Using the term "your editor" to refer to the author of an article about text editors leads to confusion.


Copyright © 2006, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds