Re: text editors
On Thu 28 Mar 2019 at 08:30:47 (+0000), Gian Uberto Lauri wrote:
> >>>>> "JH" == John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> writes:
>
> JH> deloptes writes:
> >> learning emacs means learning lisp
>
> JH> Not true.
>
> In my experience is true. But needs some more words.
>
> When you intensively start using Emacs, and you start asking to the
> editor "Oh, True One Editor, what is the meaning of this keystroke?"
> (😊) and see the answer, when you take a look to the .emacs of a more
> experienced user, you see, sooner or later you understand that there
> is a way to tell Emacs how "to do useful things"[*]. And since these
> things are useful to you, you learn to do them. Even if you do not
> know that what you are doing is "programming in LISP".
>
> [*] I lost the source where I read that in an organization even
> secretaries used Emacs, and that these secretaries learnt how to do
> "useful things" without a problem. Mostly because they were unaware
> they were programming.
I would have thought that secretaries were more competent at
cut-and-paste than I am, and that is the way in which I have assembled
my ~250 line emacs startup file. That, and substituting one string
for another in these pasted sections and seeing if they still work.
I'm afraid I don't call that programming in *lisp or learning *lisp.
Some of the code dates back to lenny, and I have no idea whether it
ought still to be there, or whether it's having a desirable or
undesirable effect. I suspect it, and some other bits have atrophied.
When I read through it (like now), I find useful things that I'd
forgotten I had set up. OTOH I rely on much of it all the time.
If you call the programming/learning, then that's where our
disagreement lies, and not in emacs at all. You could equally
be talking about those incantations that I feed to ALSA.
Cheers,
David.
Reply to: