Re: What's your favourite *under_publicized* editing feature ofEmacs?

[David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>]

Cthun <cthun_117@qmail.net.au> writes:

> On 28/02/2011 4:53 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Stefan Monnier<monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>  writes:
>>
>>>>>>> This is nothing to do with being an academic. What happens when, for
>>>>>>> instance, a novel is being published? The author sends it to the
>>>>>>> publisher, who sends back a copy with various changes, which the author
>>>>>>> then either accepts, accepts in some modified form, or rejects. This
>>>>>>> process is then iterated several times.
>>>>>> And this process does not involve a CVS repository.
>>>>> With me, it nowadays usually involves a git repository.  I used CVS
>>>>> previously, but that is less convenient.
>>>> You're insane.

I should say _that_ would be an unsubstantiated claim.  Though being
insane might have something to do with Lisp.

>>> No
>
> What does Monnier's classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have
> to do with Lisp, Kastrup?
>
>> I do this for work I do quite by myself (like theses and articles).
>
> How odd.

Not at all.

>> Makes it much easier to keep track of work you do.
>
> What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have to do
> with Lisp, Kastrup? Using version control software entails a lot of
> complex use of command-line tools to check out, copy, and check in
> files, Kastrup,

That's why one uses a Lisp-based editor with version-control support
called Emacs to do the hard work.

> and that's after scaling the software's learning curve. This hardly
> seems likely to be "much easier" than just using a word processor like
> normal folk, Kastrup.

Your discussion style (or rather your apodictic statement style) does
not suggest that you would be able to speak for normal folk with
authority.

-- 
David Kastrup