Dave's difficulties with manual activities
in [Lisp]
|
Prev: Symbol reader macros
Next: Read CSV in SBCL
From: Evan I on 11 Sep 2009 01:14 Dave Searles <searles(a)hoombah.nurt.bt.uk> writes: > Turgut Durduran wrote: >> On 2009-09-08, Alan Mackenzie <acm(a)muc.de> wrote: >>>> While failing to call them by the industry-standard names. (And if >>>> it does retain a history of past clipboard entries, it can't >>>> possibly be doing so using the system-native clipboard on Windows >>>> or, I expect, the Mac. So there's another problem: if you cut text >>>> in emacs and then try to paste it in Thunderbird or whatever, >>>> you'll get nothing or the wrong text out of the paste. >>> This may be true. I personally don't use Emacs in a GUI, so I wouldn't >>> know. If what you say is true, then it's a bug. Emacs does have bugs, >>> though probably not as many as the "standard" says it should. ;-) >> >> It is not true. > > And yet it must be: since the Windows clipboard doesn't have a history > and the emacs one does, they must be separate clipboards. > The top of the mountain is the bottom of the sky. >>> Oh, lots of people are critical of Emacs. Much of that criticism is >>> positive and helpful, and helps the improvement of Emacs. Your criticism >>> doesn't fall into this category, sadly. Your expectations of Emacs were >>> clearly unrealistic. >> >> They are quite realistic and easy to implement but they would >> cripple emacs > > They would not. Unless you believe an important purpose of emacs is to > keep out normal computer users, in which case I can attack your > problematic motives and elitism. Either way, you lose. > A simple pocket knife is a poor but serviceable screwdriver, an expensive and brittle pry bar, and a mediocre hammer. But serviceable to get the job down. This is the CUA binding set. My hammer will not cut at all, but is a better pry bar, and is completely useless as a screwdriver. The standard emacs binding set is the top drawer in the tool box, and doesn't have your favorite little pocket knife. Of course you could put it there if you wanted. Emacs itself is a powerful text editing tool with a workshop for creating better tools built in. I might be upset if I had to work in an auto shop if I only knew how to use a pocket knife. Unfortunately I am simply not elite enough to understand how to use an auto shops tools, and I would be useless in a tool and dye shop. But in emacs I am plenty elite enough to use the tool designed to do what I need, and I am certainly elite enough to use my very humble lisp knowledge to extend it as I need. Not beautifully enough to be shared, but plenty good enough for my needs. So yes, I too am very much an elitest, and I am using an elite tool designed for other elite people like me. And there are enough of us to guarantee it's longevity, since it can be maintained and updated as long as there is a single user that uses it. And there are far far more of us that that. Since it is a lisp programming environment (and far far more) programmed in a lisp dialect, it is easily customisable by people like yourself. Of course it is possible that lisp may go out of fashion some day far far in the future, but that doesn't seem likely. On the other hand is java as intrinsic to the field? Can eclipse be rapidly adjusted to fit the users desires in the same language it was designed for? Absolutely. Is that language as easy to work with as lisp? A matter of personal opinion. > >> He wants emacs to behave something like notepad or at best like wordpad. > > I didn't say that. What would be the point? But it can keep all of its > unique, genuinely useful text-manipulation features (with perhaps some > rebound) so long as it's a proper superset of notepad or wordpad, one > that will NOT trip people up that try to do normal text editing the > normal way. This is of course easily achievable on any sites local distribution by simply enabling it. Please address this concern to your sites administrator and be prepared to annoy everyone who has to modify their ..elisp file to cope with your failure to do so. On another note you mentioned contextual menus. I agree that for those mouse dependent users out there contextual menus should be able to be defined that can recognize the text under the mouse as a hinting system. I do not know whether this behavior exists within emacs, but it appears to be lacking from most major modes. This may become a long term project for me to look at. Thank you for the inspiration. --tali713
From: Espen Vestre on 11 Sep 2009 02:24 Dave Searles <searles(a)hoombah.nurt.bt.uk> writes: > I will take that as your conceding that you still don't have a logical > argument against what I've said. There's no point in trying to argue with you before you behave like a grown-up. My advice was well meant - take it or leave it. -- (espen)
From: Alan Mackenzie on 11 Sep 2009 02:42 In comp.emacs Dave Searles <searles(a)hoombah.nurt.bt.uk> wrote: > Alan Mackenzie wrote: >> but the fact it[Emacs]'s got a substantial enthusiastic following is >> good evidence for its intrinsic goodness. > Don't be ridiculous. Radium watches had a substantial enthusiastic > following in the 50s. So did thalidomide. In the 30s it was Nazism. What's this? Are you trying to demonstrate Godwin's law? Look, Dave, I do hope you manage to find a job soon. I really do. All the best, -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).
From: Turgut Durduran on 11 Sep 2009 02:46 On 2009-09-11, Dave Searles <searles(a)hoombah.nurt.bt.uk> wrote: > Turgut Durduran wrote: >> On 2009-09-10, Dave Searles <searles(a)hoombah.nurt.bt.uk> wrote: >>> Turgut Durduran wrote: >>>> I think the latter because he can fire up emacs and use it like anything >>>> else given that his example is to write a letter to his granny. >>> Clearly false; as soon as an attempt is made to use the clipboard, if >>> not sooner, it will all go pear-shaped. >> >> No. > > Yes. As soon as the user hits control-C, control-X, shift-ins, or > something, it will do something surprising and dismaying. No. > If they have > something important in the clipboard and use the mouse to select > something (perhaps to replace with the clipboard contents using paste), > the clipboard contents will, surprisingly and dismayingly, get > clobbered. They will trip over various emacs idiosyncrasies, guaranteed. It will work like the standard (*). ugdc (*) As always defined the same way as yours.
From: Turgut Durduran on 11 Sep 2009 02:48
On 2009-09-11, Dave Searles <searles(a)hoombah.nurt.bt.uk> wrote: > Turgut Durduran wrote: >> On 2009-09-10, Dave Searles <searles(a)hoombah.nurt.bt.uk> wrote: >>> David Kastrup wrote: >>>> The current state of Emacs is such that you can pretty much work with it >>>> without putting in learning time. >>> Clearly false; the first time you go to cut, copy, or paste anything, it >>> will blow up in your face. >> >> No it won't. > > Yes it will. As soon as someone hits C-c or C-x, kaboom! Why would I hit those? I like standards (*) and I use them all around my OS. ugdc (*) Defined the same way as you did. |