From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Miles Bader Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: reading the C source of Emacs Date: 13 Jan 2003 15:17:00 +0900 Organization: Global Online Japan Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+gnu-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <87znq5bmlf.fsf@tc-1-100.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1042438897 2689 80.91.224.249 (13 Jan 2003 06:21:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 06:21:37 +0000 (UTC) Return-path: Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18XxyZ-0000hE-00 for ; Mon, 13 Jan 2003 07:21:36 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 18Xxy2-0008Hi-09 for gnu-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 13 Jan 2003 01:21:02 -0500 Original-Path: shelby.stanford.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!cyclone.bc.net!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!newsfeed.gol.com!203.216.70.8.MISMATCH!not-for-mail Original-Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.help Original-Lines: 15 Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: tc-2-205.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp Original-X-Trace: nnrp.gol.com 1042438620 29882 203.216.25.205 (13 Jan 2003 06:17:00 GMT) Original-X-Complaints-To: abuse@gol.com Original-NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 06:17:00 +0000 (UTC) System-Type: i686-pc-linux-gnu Original-Xref: shelby.stanford.edu gnu.emacs.help:108888 Original-To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b5 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+gnu-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:5417 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.help:5417 On Sat, 11 Jan 2003 Oliver Scholz wrote: > And I agree with David that it might be useful to do an on-demand > kind of learning, rather than trying to just grok everything. That's for sure. If you just to try to `grok everything,' you'll quickly go insane; there's just too much code, and much of it can be confusing if you just skim it (it isn't the most well-organized code in the world). Trying to figure how it does one particular thing is usually (!) straight-forward though. -Miles -- 80% of success is just showing up. --Woody Allen