Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.user > #206560 > unrolled thread
| Started by | mick crane <mick.crane@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2019-03-25 05:40 +0100 |
| Last post | 2019-03-30 12:20 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 118 — 29 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user
text editors mick crane <mick.crane@gmail.com> - 2019-03-25 05:40 +0100
Re: text editors Cindy-Sue Causey <butterflybytes@gmail.com> - 2019-03-25 06:00 +0100
Re: text editors Jude DaShiell <jdashiel@panix.com> - 2019-03-25 06:10 +0100
Re: text editors Erik Christiansen <dvalin@internode.on.net> - 2019-03-25 06:40 +0100
Re: text editors mick crane <mick.crane@gmail.com> - 2019-03-25 09:00 +0100
Re: text editors Erik Christiansen <dvalin@internode.on.net> - 2019-03-25 11:20 +0100
Re: text editors mick crane <mick.crane@gmail.com> - 2019-03-25 11:40 +0100
Re: text editors Dan Hitt <dan.hitt@gmail.com> - 2019-03-25 07:00 +0100
Re: text editors john doe <johndoe65534@mail.com> - 2019-03-25 07:40 +0100
Re: text editors <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-03-25 12:10 +0100
Re: text editors rhkramer@gmail.com - 2019-03-25 12:50 +0100
Re: text editors rhkramer@gmail.com - 2019-03-25 13:10 +0100
Re: text editors Étienne Mollier <etienne.mollier@mailoo.org> - 2019-03-25 21:20 +0100
Re: text editors deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2019-03-25 22:10 +0100
Re: text editors Teemu Likonen <tlikonen@iki.fi> - 2019-03-25 13:30 +0100
Re: text editors mick crane <mick.crane@gmail.com> - 2019-03-26 08:40 +0100
Re: text editors Teemu Likonen <tlikonen@iki.fi> - 2019-03-26 16:50 +0100
Re: text editors John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-03-26 18:00 +0100
Re: text editors Håkon Alstadheim <hakon@alstadheim.priv.no> - 2019-03-26 21:20 +0100
Re: text editors Erik Christiansen <dvalin@internode.on.net> - 2019-03-27 03:30 +0100
Re: text editors rhkramer@gmail.com - 2019-03-27 13:10 +0100
Re: text editors <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-03-27 14:30 +0100
Re: text editors John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-03-27 15:10 +0100
Re: text editors <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-03-27 15:40 +0100
Re: text editors rlharris@oplink.net - 2019-03-27 17:30 +0100
Re: text editors rlharris@oplink.net - 2019-03-28 18:40 +0100
keyboard macros (was: Re: text editors) rhkramer@gmail.com - 2019-03-28 19:00 +0100
Re: keyboard macros John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-03-28 19:30 +0100
Re: keyboard macros Cindy-Sue Causey <butterflybytes@gmail.com> - 2019-03-28 20:00 +0100
Re: keyboard macros rlharris@oplink.net - 2019-03-28 19:50 +0100
Re: keyboard macros John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-03-28 20:10 +0100
xfce launchers rlharris@oplink.net - 2019-04-03 18:40 +0200
Re: xfce launchers Mike Kupfer <mkupfer@alum.berkeley.edu> - 2019-04-04 07:20 +0200
Re: xfce launchers rlharris@oplink.net - 2019-04-04 07:40 +0200
Re: text editors Erik Christiansen <dvalin@internode.on.net> - 2019-03-29 06:20 +0100
Re: text editors deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2019-03-28 03:40 +0100
Re: text editors John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-03-28 03:50 +0100
Re: text editors deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2019-03-28 08:00 +0100
Re: text editors <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-03-28 09:20 +0100
Re: text editors <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-03-28 10:40 +0100
Re: text editors deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2019-03-28 21:10 +0100
Emacs without knowing any Lisp (was: text editors) Ben Finney <bignose@debian.org> - 2019-03-29 02:50 +0100
Re: Emacs without knowing any Lisp (was: text editors) Bill Wood <william.wood3@comcast.net> - 2019-03-29 06:50 +0100
Re: text editors John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-03-28 14:10 +0100
Re: text editors <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-03-28 14:50 +0100
Re: text editors David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2019-03-28 14:30 +0100
Re: text editors John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-03-28 15:20 +0100
Re: text editors <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-03-28 15:30 +0100
Re: text editors deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2019-03-28 21:30 +0100
Re: text editors deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2019-03-29 00:40 +0100
Re: text editors Erik Christiansen <dvalin@internode.on.net> - 2019-03-29 06:30 +0100
Re: text editors Teemu Likonen <tlikonen@iki.fi> - 2019-03-29 09:00 +0100
Re: text editors Erik Christiansen <dvalin@internode.on.net> - 2019-03-29 10:20 +0100
Re: text editors Erik Christiansen <dvalin@internode.on.net> - 2019-03-29 12:40 +0100
Re: text editors Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2019-03-29 18:00 +0100
Re: text editors deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2019-03-29 19:50 +0100
Re: text editors John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-03-29 20:10 +0100
Re: text editors deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2019-03-30 00:10 +0100
Re: text editors Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2019-03-30 00:30 +0100
Re: text editors John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-03-30 01:20 +0100
Re: text editors deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2019-03-30 01:40 +0100
Re: text editors David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2019-03-30 04:30 +0100
Re: text editors deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2019-03-30 09:30 +0100
What does all this mean? was Re: text editors David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2019-03-30 17:20 +0100
Re: text editors Erik Christiansen <dvalin@internode.on.net> - 2019-03-30 05:30 +0100
Re: text editors Bob Bernstein <poobah@ruptured-duck.com> - 2019-03-30 02:20 +0100
Re: text editors John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-03-30 02:30 +0100
Re: text editors David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2019-03-30 01:50 +0100
Re: text editors deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2019-04-01 12:10 +0200
Re: text editors <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-04-01 12:10 +0200
Re: text editors Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2019-04-01 12:50 +0200
Re: text editors David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2019-04-01 16:40 +0200
Re: text editors Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2019-04-01 16:00 +0200
Re: text editors "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> - 2019-04-01 16:30 +0200
Re: text editors deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2019-04-01 16:50 +0200
Re: text editors Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2019-04-01 17:40 +0200
Re: text editors Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2019-04-01 18:20 +0200
Re: text editors "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> - 2019-04-01 19:50 +0200
Re: text editors John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-04-01 18:40 +0200
Re: text editors deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2019-04-01 16:50 +0200
Re: text editors <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-04-01 17:10 +0200
Re: text editors deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2019-03-29 11:00 +0100
Re: text editors John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-03-29 13:00 +0100
Re: text editors deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2019-03-28 21:20 +0100
Re: text editors deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2019-03-29 10:50 +0100
Re: text editors Erik Christiansen <dvalin@internode.on.net> - 2019-03-29 11:50 +0100
Re: text editors David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2019-03-28 17:20 +0100
Re: text editors John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-03-28 17:50 +0100
Re: text editors Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2019-03-28 18:20 +0100
Re: text editors Dekks Herton <dekkzz78@gmail.com> - 2019-03-29 10:40 +0100
Re: text editors David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2019-03-29 20:30 +0100
Re: text editors Jude DaShiell <jdashiel@panix.com> - 2019-03-30 03:20 +0100
Re: text editors David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2019-04-01 18:40 +0200
Re: text editors Dekks Herton <dekkzz78@gmail.com> - 2019-03-29 10:40 +0100
Re: text editors Teemu Likonen <tlikonen@iki.fi> - 2019-03-27 20:40 +0100
Re: text editors Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2019-03-28 01:30 +0100
Re: text editors Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2019-03-27 12:10 +0100
Re: text editors Teemu Likonen <tlikonen@iki.fi> - 2019-03-28 07:30 +0100
Re: text editors <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-03-28 11:40 +0100
Re: text editors "tomas@tuxteam.de" <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-03-28 12:30 +0100
Re: text editors "tomas@tuxteam.de" <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-03-28 13:00 +0100
Re: text editors Pierre Fourès <pierre.foures@gmail.com> - 2019-03-28 17:50 +0100
Re: text editors deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2019-03-28 21:40 +0100
Re: text editors mick crane <mick.crane@gmail.com> - 2019-03-27 10:00 +0100
Re: text editors Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2019-03-27 11:20 +0100
Re: text editors Teemu Likonen <tlikonen@iki.fi> - 2019-03-27 16:50 +0100
Understanding (some) Lisp (was: Re: text editors) rhkramer@gmail.com - 2019-03-28 17:10 +0100
Re: Understanding (some) Lisp Teemu Likonen <tlikonen@iki.fi> - 2019-03-28 17:20 +0100
Re: text editors Ben Finney <bignose@debian.org> - 2019-03-26 03:30 +0100
Re: text editors Teemu Likonen <tlikonen@iki.fi> - 2019-03-26 06:30 +0100
Re: text editors Tony Rowe <ay986@chebucto.ns.ca> - 2019-03-26 23:40 +0100
Re: text editors Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2019-03-28 01:30 +0100
Re: text editors John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-03-28 03:00 +0100
Re: text editors <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-03-28 09:20 +0100
Re: text editors mick crane <mick.crane@gmail.com> - 2019-03-27 12:10 +0100
Re: text editors Erik Christiansen <dvalin@internode.on.net> - 2019-03-29 07:30 +0100
Re: text editors Erik Christiansen <dvalin@internode.on.net> - 2019-03-29 09:30 +0100
Re: text editors mick crane <mick.crane@gmail.com> - 2019-03-30 12:20 +0100
Page 5 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 Next page →
| From | <tomas@tuxteam.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-04-01 17:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <xI6Js-3A8-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #206877 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 04:47:18PM +0200, deloptes wrote: [...] > No problem at all [...] Thanks for not taking it personally. > Lets hope someone else goes the way to the end ... like Copernicus, Bruno > and others did over 200years. > > Amen! :D :-) Cheers -- tomás
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-03-29 11:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <xGWsO-14g-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #206760 |
Gian Uberto Lauri wrote: > " It seems to me that there have been two really clean, consistent > models of programming so far: the C model and the Lisp model. These > two seem points of high ground, with swampy lowlands between them. As > computers have grown more powerful, the new languages being developed > have been moving steadily toward the Lisp model." Was this statement made before OOP came to the world? looks like
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-03-29 13:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <xGYkW-2f4-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #206777 |
Gian quotes: > " It seems to me that there have been two really clean, consistent > models of programming so far: the C model and the Lisp model. These > two seem points of high ground, with swampy lowlands between them. As > computers have grown more powerful, the new languages being developed > have been moving steadily toward the Lisp model." deloptes writes: > Was this statement made before OOP came to the world? OOP is to the swamp between Lisp and C as the Everglades are to the wet spot in my pasture. -- John Hasler jhasler@newsguy.com Elmwood, WI USA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-03-28 21:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <xGJFf-1HK-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #206710 |
Gian Uberto Lauri wrote: > d> really, I did not know that you could be me and you knew my > d> experience. Anyway emacs is not bad for those who know it, but it > d> is impractical because you have mostly vim installed, so learning > d> vim is a must indeed. > > Your words would be very different if you had only vi, not vim. > Last time I have seen only vi in crippled variant was on Solaris8 in 2007. The first time I was free for couple of hours between two projects I compiled vim ... I received many cups of coffee from everyone useing the ~60+ Solaris systems in the landscape. > Learn how to do little things with vi is useful indeed, even ed, > chances are you could work in a situation where libcurses is gone. > > But vim is an attempt to rewrite emacs the wrong way. > Anyway no need to advocate for emacs or vim. Usually you get linux with vim you can invoke like vi or vim. My personal choice is ne on debian. For everything else there are decent editors with GUI. My preference is eclipse and kate ... but it also doesn't matter. I simply can not find any logical or practical argument learning or using emacs ... and I work with linux servers on daily bases. Come one - this is just about sharing opinions! regards
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-03-29 10:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <xGWj7-10K-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #206759 |
Gian Uberto Lauri wrote: > If your work comprises repetitive tasks that can be automated, then > Emacs can help you a lot. > > If you have several, unrelated, small tasks, theni firing up vim and > then closing it may be a good choice. > > The trick with Emacs is doing as much things you can with one istance, > avoding continual start and stops. Don't know! Really! I use some time Makefile or ansible recently for various things. I still do not find pragmatic reason for learning Emacs. As said before this is only my opinion, but I think it is important mentioning this, given the propaganda around Emacs. One can live and do everything without Emacs. For the enthusiasts, they are free to to choose how deep they dive into Emacs. regards
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Erik Christiansen <dvalin@internode.on.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-03-29 11:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <xGXfb-1Bt-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #206776 |
On 29.03.19 10:44, deloptes wrote: > One can live and do everything without Emacs. Can't resist paraphrasing that in light of Emacs' OS-like reputation: One can live and do everything within Emacs ... or without. I would be tempted to have a look at ne, except that my fingers would just continue to work vim-wise, after more than 30 years of daily vim/vi use, up to 8 hrs per day. When leading software development teams, I never asked team members which editor they favoured, either at hiring interview, or later. We just agreed on coding standards, and they configured their editors to conform. Erik
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-03-28 17:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <xGFV0-7Qt-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #206706 |
On Thu 28 Mar 2019 at 08:30:47 (+0000), Gian Uberto Lauri wrote: > >>>>> "JH" == John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> writes: > > JH> deloptes writes: > >> learning emacs means learning lisp > > JH> Not true. > > In my experience is true. But needs some more words. > > When you intensively start using Emacs, and you start asking to the > editor "Oh, True One Editor, what is the meaning of this keystroke?" > (😊) and see the answer, when you take a look to the .emacs of a more > experienced user, you see, sooner or later you understand that there > is a way to tell Emacs how "to do useful things"[*]. And since these > things are useful to you, you learn to do them. Even if you do not > know that what you are doing is "programming in LISP". > > [*] I lost the source where I read that in an organization even > secretaries used Emacs, and that these secretaries learnt how to do > "useful things" without a problem. Mostly because they were unaware > they were programming. I would have thought that secretaries were more competent at cut-and-paste than I am, and that is the way in which I have assembled my ~250 line emacs startup file. That, and substituting one string for another in these pasted sections and seeing if they still work. I'm afraid I don't call that programming in *lisp or learning *lisp. Some of the code dates back to lenny, and I have no idea whether it ought still to be there, or whether it's having a desirable or undesirable effect. I suspect it, and some other bits have atrophied. When I read through it (like now), I find useful things that I'd forgotten I had set up. OTOH I rely on much of it all the time. If you call the programming/learning, then that's where our disagreement lies, and not in emacs at all. You could equally be talking about those incantations that I feed to ALSA. Cheers, David.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-03-28 17:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <xGGo2-80s-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #206742 |
Gian writes: > [*] I lost the source where I read that in an organization even > secretaries used Emacs, and that these secretaries learnt how to do > "useful things" without a problem. Mostly because they were unaware > they were programming. It was secretaries in the patent department at Bell Labs. They were using troff and friends on Unix for typesetting and learned to write shell scripts. This probably all happened before Emacs was operational. They would have been editing with Ed. -- John "Bell Labs secretaries may have been a bit above average" Hasler jhasler@newsguy.com Elmwood, WI USA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Curt <curty@free.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-03-28 18:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <xGGR3-8pe-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #206745 |
On 2019-03-28, John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> wrote: > Gian writes: >> [*] I lost the source where I read that in an organization even >> secretaries used Emacs, and that these secretaries learnt how to do >> "useful things" without a problem. Mostly because they were unaware >> they were programming. > > It was secretaries in the patent department at Bell Labs. They were > using troff and friends on Unix for typesetting and learned to write > shell scripts. This probably all happened before Emacs was operational. > They would have been editing with Ed. I think a gorilla learned sign language once. This is much more impressive, though.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dekks Herton <dekkzz78@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-03-29 10:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <xGW9r-X2-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #206742 |
David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> writes: > On Thu 28 Mar 2019 at 08:30:47 (+0000), Gian Uberto Lauri wrote: >> >>>>> "JH" == John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> writes: >> >> JH> deloptes writes: >> >> learning emacs means learning lisp >> >> JH> Not true. >> >> In my experience is true. But needs some more words. >> >> When you intensively start using Emacs, and you start asking to the >> editor "Oh, True One Editor, what is the meaning of this keystroke?" >> (😊) and see the answer, when you take a look to the .emacs of a more >> experienced user, you see, sooner or later you understand that there >> is a way to tell Emacs how "to do useful things"[*]. And since these >> things are useful to you, you learn to do them. Even if you do not >> know that what you are doing is "programming in LISP". >> >> [*] I lost the source where I read that in an organization even >> secretaries used Emacs, and that these secretaries learnt how to do >> "useful things" without a problem. Mostly because they were unaware >> they were programming. > > I would have thought that secretaries were more competent at > cut-and-paste than I am, and that is the way in which I have assembled > my ~250 line emacs startup file. That, and substituting one string > for another in these pasted sections and seeing if they still work. > I'm afraid I don't call that programming in *lisp or learning *lisp. Don't secretaries, i've seen a lot that would make better programmers than whom they work looking at the macros they use. > Some of the code dates back to lenny, and I have no idea whether it > ought still to be there, or whether it's having a desirable or > undesirable effect. I suspect it, and some other bits have atrophied. > > When I read through it (like now), I find useful things that I'd > forgotten I had set up. OTOH I rely on much of it all the time. > > If you call the programming/learning, then that's where our > disagreement lies, and not in emacs at all. You could equally > be talking about those incantations that I feed to ALSA. > > Cheers, > David. > -- Regards......... PGP Fingerprint: 3DF8 311C 4740 B5BC 3867 72DF 1050 452F 9BCE BA00
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-03-29 20:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <xH5mp-6HK-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #206774 |
On Fri 29 Mar 2019 at 09:35:21 (+0000), Dekks Herton wrote: > David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> writes: > > On Thu 28 Mar 2019 at 08:30:47 (+0000), Gian Uberto Lauri wrote: > >> >>>>> "JH" == John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> writes: > >> > >> JH> deloptes writes: > >> >> learning emacs means learning lisp > >> > >> JH> Not true. > >> > >> In my experience is true. But needs some more words. > >> > >> When you intensively start using Emacs, and you start asking to the > >> editor "Oh, True One Editor, what is the meaning of this keystroke?" > >> (😊) and see the answer, when you take a look to the .emacs of a more > >> experienced user, you see, sooner or later you understand that there > >> is a way to tell Emacs how "to do useful things"[*]. And since these > >> things are useful to you, you learn to do them. Even if you do not > >> know that what you are doing is "programming in LISP". > >> > >> [*] I lost the source where I read that in an organization even > >> secretaries used Emacs, and that these secretaries learnt how to do > >> "useful things" without a problem. Mostly because they were unaware > >> they were programming. > > > > I would have thought that secretaries were more competent at > > cut-and-paste than I am, and that is the way in which I have assembled > > my ~250 line emacs startup file. That, and substituting one string > > for another in these pasted sections and seeing if they still work. > > I'm afraid I don't call that programming in *lisp or learning *lisp. > > Don't [•] secretaries, i've seen a lot that would make better programmers > than whom they work looking at the macros they use. [I assume that you meant to write some derogatory verb at • or else it got lost, as did your entire comment in the other two versions I've received from you.] It's rather difficult to carry on a conversation unless you use the same nouns to refer to things as others have used. Yes, when writing literature, it makes sense to add some variety in one's choice of words, but this is a technical forum. It was fairly obvious to me that "secretaries" was being used as a term to refer to "people engaged in clerical work". There are plenty of secretaries doing far more sophisticated work than this and, as a job title, the term reaches all the way to the top of organisations, with University Secretaries, Secretaries of State and the like. I think I made my point clearly enough: assembling a file of macros that do useful things does not necessarily equate with programming those said macros. I used my own startup file as an example. It turned out that the example actually involved troff, ed and shell rather than emacs and *lisp. It's probably easier for non-programmers to cobble together useful shell scripts than to make headway in *lisp, so without knowing to what level they took these scripts, it's difficult to judge whether they *were* programming. Back in the early 1970s, a 4-digit version of the game "Bulls and Cows"¹ was written using the line-by-line editor Edit (by Gill Cross) by ingenious use of its single in-store buffer. If it wasn't written by Frank King, who wrote such a game on the Titan at Cambridge, then it was obviously inspired by it. That *was* programming. ¹ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulls_and_Cows Cheers, David.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jude DaShiell <jdashiel@panix.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-03-30 03:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <xHbLb-2d5-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #206787 |
I started working for the Navy at an installation in Warminster PA. The experience with emacs David describes certainly happened on the base where I worked. The secretaries weren't told what they were doing was programming so they developed and shared their own macros and as a result of that, emacs became a legend on the base. User services knew never to disturb the emacs on the assistant technical director's computer or they would get hurt. The assistant technical director was number 3 in the hierarchy on the base's org chart. Above that position was the technical director and above the technical director was the Admiral in command of the base. --
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-04-01 18:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <xI88x-4jQ-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #206787 |
I try to quote the text I am referring to when I post here. The blob • below is meaningless without the quotation where I placed it. Here's the quotation (not your post) and what I wrote in reply: ✁✁✁✁✁✁✁✁✁✁✁✁✁✁✁✁✁✁✁✁ > Don't [•] secretaries, i've seen a lot that would make better programmers > than whom they work looking at the macros they use. [I assume that you meant to write some derogatory verb at • or else it got lost, as did your entire comment in the other two versions I've received from you.] ✃✃✃✃✃✃✃✃✃✃✃✃✃✃✃✃✃✃✃✃ On Mon 01 Apr 2019 at 08:10:49 (+0000), Gian Uberto Lauri wrote: > >>>>> "DW" == David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> writes: > > > DW> I assume that you meant to write some derogatory verb at • or > DW> else it got lost, as did your entire comment in the other two > DW> versions I've received from you. > > I think that the original tale referred to their secretaries, and no, > it was never meant to be derogatory, The reason I wrote the comment above in square brackets was because it referred to the [•], also in square brackets, rather than the thread, and not because of your writing "… even secretaries …" in the anecdote. > anyone who understand what > happens around in the workplace KNOWS how fundamental is their > co-operation. Sure. But I haven't seen the article in question and what it claims. Perhaps it indeed shows that they metamorphosed into fully-fledged programmers without so much as a course or text. If it does, then it undermines the case of those who write "learning emacs means learning lisp" as a reason not to learn emacs. Secretaries do amazing things given the right tools, or after finding them, or without them. The amazement is of course in the eye of the beholder, or the writer of articles, or anecdotes. They just *do* things, like the rest of us. Cheers, David.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dekks Herton <dekkzz78@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-03-29 10:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <xGW9s-X2-17@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #206742 |
David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> writes: > On Thu 28 Mar 2019 at 08:30:47 (+0000), Gian Uberto Lauri wrote: >> >>>>> "JH" == John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> writes: >> >> JH> deloptes writes: >> >> learning emacs means learning lisp >> >> JH> Not true. >> >> In my experience is true. But needs some more words. >> >> When you intensively start using Emacs, and you start asking to the >> editor "Oh, True One Editor, what is the meaning of this keystroke?" >> (😊) and see the answer, when you take a look to the .emacs of a more >> experienced user, you see, sooner or later you understand that there >> is a way to tell Emacs how "to do useful things"[*]. And since these >> things are useful to you, you learn to do them. Even if you do not >> know that what you are doing is "programming in LISP". >> >> [*] I lost the source where I read that in an organization even >> secretaries used Emacs, and that these secretaries learnt how to do >> "useful things" without a problem. Mostly because they were unaware >> they were programming. > > I would have thought that secretaries were more competent at > cut-and-paste than I am, and that is the way in which I have assembled > my ~250 line emacs startup file. That, and substituting one string > for another in these pasted sections and seeing if they still work. > I'm afraid I don't call that programming in *lisp or learning *lisp. > > Some of the code dates back to lenny, and I have no idea whether it > ought still to be there, or whether it's having a desirable or > undesirable effect. I suspect it, and some other bits have atrophied. > > When I read through it (like now), I find useful things that I'd > forgotten I had set up. OTOH I rely on much of it all the time. > > If you call the programming/learning, then that's where our > disagreement lies, and not in emacs at all. You could equally > be talking about those incantations that I feed to ALSA. > > Cheers, > David. > -- Regards......... PGP Fingerprint: 3DF8 311C 4740 B5BC 3867 72DF 1050 452F 9BCE BA00
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Teemu Likonen <tlikonen@iki.fi> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-03-27 20:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <xGmyZ-45E-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #206659 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
rhkramer@gmail.com [2019-03-27 08:05:30-04] wrote: > EMACS (at least before a WYSIWYG / mouse version (which I think exists > now -- was tHat XEMACS for a while and then maybe merged back into > EMACS) There is GNU Emacs and there is (or was) a GNU Emacs fork named XEmacs. Nowadays XEmacs is dead or nearly dead: no releases in ten years. XEmacs code has never been merged to GNU Emacs. There was a time in the history when it made sense to use XEmacs (some useful features that GNU Emacs hadn't) but this has not been the case for long time and GNU Emacs has gained much more. Just "Emacs" tends to mean either GNU Emacs or this family of editors which "ideologically" originated from TECO editor's macro collection named Editor Macros (EMACS). History lesson: https://everything.explained.today/Emacs/ -- /// Teemu Likonen - .-.. <https://keybase.io/tlikonen> // // PGP: 4E10 55DC 84E9 DFF6 13D7 8557 719D 69D3 2453 9450 ///
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-03-28 01:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <xGr5D-70O-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #206659 |
> And, for people coming from Windows, EMACS (at least before a WYSIWYG / mouse
> version (which I think exists now
Not sure what you mean by "now", but assuming you mean a time after
1994, then yes it exists "now".
Stefan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-03-27 12:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <xGeBr-7S5-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #206635 |
John Hasler wrote: > mick crane wrote: >> there it is then, although I've so far managed to avoid Emacs since >> heard it is more of an operating system than an editor. > > Teemu Likonen writes: >> There are those who know Emacs, and there are those who know decades >> old jokes about Emacs. > > And there are those who avoid learning what Emacs is actually like > because they have heard decades old jokes about it. I tried a couple of times. But the vi-only boxes at work kinda forced me to get familiar with that. Maybe I'll try again in the future. -- |_|O|_| |_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert |O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5 4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Teemu Likonen <tlikonen@iki.fi> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-03-28 07:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <xGwI1-29k-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #206654 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
Gian Uberto Lauri [2019-03-27 11:10:39Z] wrote:
> Nevertheless, if a remote box has ssh, finding (C-x C-f) the
>
> /scp:user@machine:/path/to/the/file
>
> loads the /pat/to/the/file file downloading it from machine. And of
> course you can save it.
Emacs can even do multi hops, editing a remote file in one machine but
the connection is through some other machine(s). An example starting
from shell's command line:
$ emacs /ssh:user@middle-machine\|ssh:user@target-machine:file
--
/// Teemu Likonen - .-.. <https://keybase.io/tlikonen> //
// PGP: 4E10 55DC 84E9 DFF6 13D7 8557 719D 69D3 2453 9450 ///
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | <tomas@tuxteam.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-03-28 11:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <xGABX-4wc-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #206709 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 08:32:40AM +0000, Gian Uberto Lauri wrote: > >>>>> "TL" == Teemu Likonen <tlikonen@iki.fi> writes: > > > TL> $ emacs /ssh:user@middle-machine\|ssh:user@target-machine:file > > This is wickedly interesting! If you find that interesting... imagine you're running your emacs (as a server) and want to edit that one system file (say /etc/apt/sources.list) as sudo (without starting an Emacs instance as root). M-x find-file <RET> /sudo::/etc/apt/sources.list (key binding for find-file is C-x C-f, or just use a GUI menu). will do the trick. It asks you for the necessary password and will cache it for a configurable time. Should it time out, it'll ask you again. The above /ssh:... pattern will have another advantage: if, while you edit the file, the ssh connection times out or breaks down, it'll reconnect if necessary (asking you for your password or ssh key passphrase, as the case may be -- unless your ssh agent is already taking care of that). Now imagine you have an ssh access as myuser to myvirtualserver.com. To edit *there*, as sudo, simply do: C-x C-f ssh:myuser@myvirtualserver.com|sudo:myvirtualserver.com:/etc/apt/sources.list This is all courtesy of Tramp, the library for access files in "non-standard places". Now enter Org-Mode. This is a kind of markup language (somewhat reminiscent of Markdown). There you can have links to other files (or positions therein). Those links can be Tramp paths as illustrated above. Bam :-) So there are many nifty things in Emacs. But the real killer is the integration of all those nifty things. Cheers -- tomás
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "tomas@tuxteam.de" <tomas@tuxteam.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-03-28 12:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <xGBol-53o-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #206724 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 11:07:58AM +0000, Gian Uberto Lauri wrote: > >>>>> <tomas@tuxteam.de> writes: [Tramp sudo method] > I do not like sudo. In my NSHO it has a lot of hidden traps and is > shipped in a way that [profanities]. To each its own, hey. As long as you don't sling profanities at me (I /do/ like sudo) all is well :-) But for you, Tramp comes also with an /su: "method". And /plink: for those poor folks trapped in a Windows client with PuTTy. And /smb: and... OK, OK. Read the docs [1] :-) Tramp is utterly nifty, but there's more. Cheers [1] https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/tramp/Quick-Start-Guide.html#Quick-Start-Guide -- t
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 5 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user
csiph-web