Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later

From	despen@verizon.net (Dan.Espen)
Newsgroups	comp.misc
Subject	Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later
Date	2014-05-14 10:46 -0400
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<icmwekzact.fsf@home.home> (permalink)
References	(3 earlier) <130520142326453241%timstreater@greenbee.net> <0.bdba31149921122e329c.20140514020829BST.87mweldv5e.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <140520141024552671%timstreater@greenbee.net> <0.2f23ca92f2b1e1216591.20140514141107BST.8761l8ec9g.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <140520141516563940%timstreater@greenbee.net>

Show all headers | View raw

Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> writes:

> In article
> <0.2f23ca92f2b1e1216591.20140514141107BST.8761l8ec9g.fsf@bsb.me.uk>,
> Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
>
>> Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> writes:
>>
>> > In article
>> > <0.bdba31149921122e329c.20140514020829BST.87mweldv5e.fsf@bsb.me.uk>,
>> > Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> writes:
>> >>
>> >> > In article
>> >> > <0.2a988d974a1a530074a9.20140513223107BST.8761l9fjs4.fsf@bsb.me.uk>,
>> >> > Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> writes:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > In article <20140513173343.a026a54b.rsw@therandymon.com>, RS Wood
>> >> >> > <rsw@therandymon.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> [Crossposted!  Follow-up set to comp.misc]
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Slate is covering "the oldest rivalry in computing" and describing it
>> >> >> >> in layman's terms, which is pretty fun to read.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > It's really quite simples:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > 1) emacs -> poubelle
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > 2) Use a GUI text editor of your choice
>> >> >>
>> >> >> What makes an editor qualify as having a GUI?  This is a genuine
>> >> >> question -- I really want to know what you feel is needed.  Being an
>> >> >> emacs fan, it seems to me that it has a GUI (at least as I use it) but
>> >> >> maybe it lacks some key attribute of GUI-hood.
>> >> >
>> >> > (I may have posted this before so apols if so)
>> >>
>> >> Not that I recall, so that's fine.  Was it intended to answer my
>> >> question because if it was, I missed how?
>> >
>> > :-)
>> >
>> > My assumption (which may be wrong these days) is that emacs is intended
>> > for use on a VT100 or equivalent
>>
>> Ah, right.  That's not a valid assumption.
>
> Then my argument might fail.
>
>> > (that was certainly the case at the
>> > time I was referring to),
>>
>> But that was in the story you told as a non-answer to my question.
>> Surely your "use a GUI text editor" was intended to be *current* advice,
>> and my "does emacs fail to have a GUI?" should surely be taken to mean
>> now, when your advice might be followed?
>
> In the time since the epoch of the story, I've not had emacs presented
> as a GUI app usable with (as I believe I already mentioned) GUI
> characteristics such as mouse, drag/drop, etc etc. 
>
> Lessee now: <navigates to /usr/bin, double-clicks on the emacs icon>.
> Yes, that opens - in a Terminal window - an application that is driving
> the window as a vt100. So, not a GUI in my book.

Without knowing a lot of details, hard to tell what your issue is.
No menu bar?  Cygwin?  $DISPLAY not exported?

> Equally, I don't regard vim as having a GUI.

gvim.

-- 
Dan Espen

Thread

Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-05-13 17:33 +0000
  Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2014-05-13 19:47 +0200
  Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-13 18:02 +0000
    Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-05-13 18:22 +0000
      Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-13 20:31 +0000
      Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-14 14:12 +0200
        Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-05-14 14:05 +0000
  Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Peter Percival <peterxpercival@hotmail.com> - 2014-05-13 19:47 +0100
  Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-13 21:39 +0100
    Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-05-13 22:31 +0100
      Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-13 23:26 +0100
        Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later despen@verizon.net (Dan.Espen) - 2014-05-13 20:22 -0400
          Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2014-05-14 10:44 +0000
            Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later despen@verizon.net (Dan.Espen) - 2014-05-14 09:59 -0400
          Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-14 12:24 +0100
            Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later despen@verizon.net (Dan.Espen) - 2014-05-14 10:14 -0400
        Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-05-14 02:08 +0100
          Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-14 10:24 +0100
            Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-05-14 13:01 +0300
              Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2014-05-14 10:47 +0000
                Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-05-14 15:39 +0300
                Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2014-05-14 18:51 +0000
                Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-05-14 22:40 +0300
                Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2014-05-14 20:15 +0000
                Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-05-14 14:01 +0000
                Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2014-05-14 18:53 +0000
                Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-05-15 11:39 +0000
            Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-05-14 14:11 +0100
              Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-14 15:16 +0100
                Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later despen@verizon.net (Dan.Espen) - 2014-05-14 10:46 -0400
                Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-05-15 13:37 +0100
                Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-15 22:42 +0100
                Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-05-15 23:14 +0100
                Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2014-05-16 04:00 -0300
                Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Hils <hils@saynotospam.net> - 2014-05-16 10:46 +0100
            Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later despen@verizon.net (Dan.Espen) - 2014-05-14 10:17 -0400
              Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2014-05-14 16:55 -0300
                Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-05-15 00:07 +0300
                Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2014-05-16 03:46 -0300
                Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Damien Wyart <damien.wyart@free.fr> - 2014-05-15 08:03 +0200
        Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later "tdk" <forum.tdk@squte.com> - 2014-05-15 11:41 -0500
          Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@hushmail.com> - 2014-05-15 13:44 -0500
          Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-05-15 21:59 +0000
    Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-14 14:21 +0200
      Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-14 14:00 +0000
  Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us (Scott Alfter) - 2014-05-13 21:33 +0000
    Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2014-05-14 10:02 +0000
      Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-05-14 10:20 +0000
  Re: Slate covers emacs vs. vim, 40 years later Christian Brandt <brandtc@psi5.com> - 2014-05-15 09:32 +0200

csiph-web