Re: why must emacs depend on sound packages?
On Sat, May 02, 2009 at 07:30:25AM EDT, Harry Rickards wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Sorry, sent it to Chris Jones, not the list by mistake.
No harm done. I was going to reply off-list and then I noticed that you
had re-posted.
> >>> Why must emacs depend on sound packages?
.. because it is a full-fledged integrated desktop?
:-)
[..]
> Plus, even though emacs does other stuff apart from editing, what can
> emacs do that a separate tool can't do? Surely if emacs is more than
> an editor, it doesn't follow Doug McIlroy's UNIX philosophy:
>
> Write programs that *do one thing and do it well*. Write programs to
> work together. Write programs to handle text streams, because that is
> a universal interface
Maybe one problem with that is that where there is some degree of
consistency across the board as long as you stick with line-mode tools
from the shell prompt, screen-mode programs are a different story.
I find switching between vim.. mutt.. slrn.. Elinks.. mc ... rather
frustrating because they are all so different in terms of "look and
feel".
Since emacs & extensions appear to do everything I have currently set up
on my desktop including mail & web browsing and should therefore provide
one consistent interface that covers my needs out of the box, I am
beginning to think that if I can find some config file or other that
provides ergonomically sound keyboard mappings, I should give it another
shot.
CJ
Reply to: