the Modernization of Emacs
in [Lisp]
|
From: Greg Menke on 14 Apr 2006 10:01 "Rob Thorpe" <robert.thorpe(a)antenova.com> writes: > Greg Menke wrote: > > Why should we "consider" this when setting up your idiosyncratic > > preferences is a trivial matter of modifying your own .emacs file? > > The problem is the default themselves being inappropriate. An > experienced user can easily change the default once they are > experienced. The problem is the unusable defaults presented to the new > user, who by virtue of being a beginner is unable to change them. Then Xah should feel free to set up his own bizarre Emacs configuration, publish it on the web and be the savior of emacs newbies everywhere. I fail to see why his issues require work on anyone else's part. Greg
From: zitterbewegung@gmail.com on 14 Apr 2006 10:43 Keyboard shortcuts and other enhancements have been done to Aquamacs. It's main focus is to modify emacs to conform to apple's human interface guidelines. See http://www.aquamacs.org
From: Xah Lee on 14 Apr 2006 11:39 Some Notes about Terminology The terminology “buffer†or “keybindingâ€, are technical terms having to do with software programing. The term “keybinding†refers to the association of a keystroke with a command in a technical, software application programing context. That is to say, one “bind†a keystroke to a command in a application framework. The term “buffer†refers to a temporary abstract area for storing data, in the context of programing or computer science. These terms are irrelevant to the users of a software application. As a user of a text editor, he works with files. The terms “opened file†or “untitled file†are more appropriate than “bufferâ€. Since emacs is also used for many things beside files, for example, file management, ftp/sftp, shell, email, irc etc., the proper term can be “work areaâ€, “work spaceâ€, or simply “windowâ€. And, the term “keyboard shortcut†refers to typing of a key-combination to activate a command. It is also more appropriate than “binding†or “keybindingâ€. Adapting these terms will not only increase emacs popularity, but are in fact more correct if we really want to tech geek about it. ---- This post is archived at: http://xahlee.org/emacs/modernization.html Xah xah(a)xahlee.org ∑ http://xahlee.org/
From: Miles Bader on 14 Apr 2006 14:57 "Xah Lee" <xah(a)xahlee.org> writes: > Adapting these terms will not only increase emacs popularity, but are > in fact more correct if we really want to tech geek about it. You're deluding yourself Xah. -Miles -- We live, as we dream -- alone....
From: Tim X on 14 Apr 2006 23:58
Greg Menke <gregm-xyzpdq3(a)toadmail.com> writes: > "Rob Thorpe" <robert.thorpe(a)antenova.com> writes: > >> Greg Menke wrote: >> > Why should we "consider" this when setting up your idiosyncratic >> > preferences is a trivial matter of modifying your own .emacs file? >> >> The problem is the default themselves being inappropriate. An >> experienced user can easily change the default once they are >> experienced. The problem is the unusable defaults presented to the new >> user, who by virtue of being a beginner is unable to change them. > > Then Xah should feel free to set up his own bizarre Emacs configuration, > publish it on the web and be the savior of emacs newbies everywhere. I > fail to see why his issues require work on anyone else's part. > Exactly. In fact, there are already packages out there which will change the default configuration to something someone else believes is better for beginners - I think there is a package called something like easymacs or something similar which tries to do exactly that. What gets on my nerves about Xah's posting is that all he does is complain about how bad things are, but doesn't actually make any real contribution. As you say, he should make the changes and then just publish them. Tim -- tcross (at) rapttech dot com dot au |