- Aquamacs vs emacs how to#
- Aquamacs vs emacs software#
- Aquamacs vs emacs download#
- Aquamacs vs emacs windows#
Aquamacs vs emacs windows#
You could not get Unix or Linux at home, everyone had windows or DOS. Almost everybody used CDE and emacs when working on Unix. Nobody liked vi, it was not even perceived as a developer's editor. The only choices in the Unix lab were emacs, vi, and CDE. Maybe Stallman and company should take a look at it. Computers got more powerful so that now even home computers can run emacs in a spritely fashion, and so I use emacs for certain things, but only because I retained that muscle memory from micro-emacs. So I got the muscle memory to use basic emacs commands from micro-emacs. It resembled emacs to the extent that what it did, it did the emacs way, control A to get to the beginning of a line, control E to get to the end, that kind of thing. It only had basic functionality, but that was enough to say, write and edit a C program. And I must say, Micro-Emacs worked pretty well on that Atari.
Aquamacs vs emacs download#
You would download them and then uudecode them to get your binary, and that's what I did. Binaries on Usenet were uuencoded into ASCII character files that looked to the system like text.
But I needed a plain text editor for my atari and I ended up downloading microemacs from some alt.binary newsgroup of Usenet. I had been exposed to emacs at work on a unix system, and it was sloooow.
Aquamacs vs emacs software#
Other proposed changes involved "discoverability," including the default enabling of various modes, although to incorporate them into GNU Emacs "would often require the author to sign copyrights over to the Free Software Foundation, which is not something all authors are willing to do."īack in the 80s, when personal computers were rather limited, I had an Atari ST. Besides, as he noted, the current mouse behavior was derived from "what was the standard in X Windows around 1990" while one wouldn't want to act in haste, it might just be about time for an update. This would be relatively easy to do, he said, since mouse bindings are separate from everything else. Stallman suggested offering a "reshuffled mode" that would bring the context menu to an unadorned right-button click, and which would add some of the expected basic editing commands there as well. The right mouse button with the control key held down does produce a menu defined by the current major mode, but that is evidently not what is being requested here that menu, some say, should present global actions rather mode-specific ones.
Many experienced Emacs users have come to like this behavior, but it is surprising to newcomers. In Emacs, instead, that button marks a region ("selection"), with a second click in the same spot yanking ("cutting") the selected text.
The situation with mouse behavior is similar as several participants in the discussion pointed out, users of graphical interfaces have come to expect that a right-button click will produce a menu of available actions. It is unfortunate that the people who implemented the newer editors chose incompatibility with Emacs. It would create a different editor that we Emacs users would never switch to. It is not an option to change these basic key bindings to imitate other, newer editors. That, of course, would break the finger memory of large numbers of existing Emacs users, who would be unlikely to appreciate the disruption. Many participants in the discussion said that this mode should be on by default.
Aquamacs vs emacs how to#
These bindings are easily had by turning on the Cua mode, but new users tend not to know about this mode or how to enable it. On the keyboard side, users have come to expect certain actions from certain keystrokes ^X to cut a selection, ^V to paste it, etc. From that, a proper theme engine could be supported, making dark themes and such easily available to those who want them.Īnother area where Emacs is insufficiently "modern", it seems, has to do with keyboard and mouse bindings. But there does seem to be general agreement that Emacs could benefit from a better, more centralized approach to color themes, rather than having color names hard-coded throughout various Elisp packages. LWN.net re-visits the emacs-devel mailing list, where the Emacs 28 development cycle has revived discussions about how to make the text editor more "modern" and attractive to new users:Ī default dark theme may not be in the future, leading one to think that there may yet be hope for the world in general.
0 kommentar(er)
