On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 20:27:57 -0500, Alan Shutko <ats@acm.org> wrote: > "Scott C. Linnenbringer" <sl@panix.com> writes: > > > I'd say the emacs guys have run out of things to implement. > > Not really. There are a few branches working on longer-term things > already. Also, there are a number of things already implemented in > CVS that haven't been released. Why? Well, the last couple releases > have been bug-fix releases, so the new features had been held off. > And the pretest process to ensure the release is stable takes time, > so that delayed previous releases. I don't think a prerelease has > started for the latest release, yet. Well, sure, they can always do more. But considering emacs' original goal was to be a set of macros for editing text, I don't think it's possible to go any further with it, staying with that original intent, after 20 years or so of development. But, someone's bound to say that emacs' original intent was to "edit text" and *more*. And the term "editing text" can arguably be defined more loosely than I am using it as. And that's why people use it. (and to prevent this from going too far, I'll say that emacs no doubt serves an excellent purpose and is an excellent piece of software, used and enjoyed by many users for different tasks. this should in no way be interpreted as an 'emacs has too much/is bloated/is an operating system' post.) ;) -- scott c. linnenbringer | sl@panix.com http://www.panix.com/~sl | sl@moslug.org jabber: sl@theoretic.com | irc: Jawoota
Attachment:
pgpJhncB0HfC1.pgp
Description: PGP signature