Re: emacs or xemacs ?
Rob Mahurin wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 14, 1999 at 07:32:22PM -0400, Kristopher Johnson wrote:
> > I honestly don't mean to start a holy war here, but I'd like to
> > know: Is there anyone who prefers Emacs to XEmacs, and why?
>
> I use emacs when I'm in a text terminal (like right now) because I
> haven't figured out how to use Xemacs' menus from the text terminal
> and some of the functions of Xemacs (e.g., syntax highlighting) seem
> inaccessible without mouse access to the proper menus. In addition,
> the cut and paste works differently in Xemacs (in a text terminal)
> than in any other text-based program, and it always messes with me. I
> am sure that these things are configureable, but I haven't found them
> and I don't feel like learning Lisp and reading the source.
Actually, that's precisely why I like XEmacs--it has menu options
for doing most of the configuration. My biggest complaint about
"classic" Emacs was the need to spend hours going through Lisp
source code to figure out what magic to add to .emacs (and I
actually *like* Lisp).
I agree that if you are using a text terminal, then there is no
reason to use XEmacs. I should have qualified my original
question to say "is there anyone who prefers Emacs to XEmacs on
an X terminal?" With the extra nice features of XEmacs, I wonder
why anyone would continue to use the ugly-and-hard-to-use
version.
- Kris
Reply to: