[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: bi

On Wed, 16 Apr 1997, Boris D. Beletsky wrote:

> >>>>>>>> On Wed, 16 Apr 1997, Vadim wrote:
> Vadim> Two reasons emacs is slow: 1. Lisp (jed is faster than emacs
> Vadim> because it uses S-Lang (however they spell it)). 
> My beloved Vadik, :) there is nothing objectively "fast" about slang
> and nothing "slow" about lisp. Emacs seems to be alot more
> complicated then jed that's all. (maybe jed is faster just because
> it meant to be "fast emacs clone"?)

Dearest Borik, you should know that various Lisps (scheme, e-lisp,
etc.) are interpreted really really slow, and S-Lang is interpreted
faster.  As far as I know, jed can do basically the same things emacs
can.  It's still slower than vi, because vi doesn't make 8 system
calls per keystroke (as emacs does).  And about jed being faster
because it's supposed to be a faster emacs clone -- let's call emacs a
faster ed clone and see how it works ;)

> Always truly yours,
> borik

I love you too, bro.

Vadim Vygonets * vadik@cs.huji.ac.il * vadik@debian.org * Unix admin
If you think C++ is not overly complicated, just what is a protected
abstract virtual base pure virtual private destructor, and when was
the last time you needed one?  -- Tom Cargil, C++ Journal, Fall 1990.

TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-user-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .

Reply to: