From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rusi Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: Emacs Book Vs Emacs Manuals Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2015 11:12:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <9e0032db-1717-4cd0-88bb-bd97219b65df@googlegroups.com> References: <554C9356.5000204@gmail.com> <20150508125314086261755@bob.proulx.com> <87bnhuc177.fsf@mbork.pl> <55561B9E.4070101@arlsoft.com> <87y4kpfvct.fsf@debian.uxu> <87mvzmv7ef.fsf@nl106-137-147.student.uu.se> <871tgycjae.fsf@mbork.pl> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1435428927 5508 80.91.229.3 (27 Jun 2015 18:15:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2015 18:15:27 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jun 27 20:15:27 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Z8udN-0005Iv-SC for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 20:15:22 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36578 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z8udM-000186-Ny for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 14:15:20 -0400 X-Received: by 10.13.203.13 with SMTP id n13mr9183360ywd.40.1435428767007; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 11:12:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.50.64.179 with SMTP id p19mr64040igs.6.1435428766970; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 11:12:46 -0700 (PDT) Original-Path: usenet.stanford.edu!j5no502769qga.1!news-out.google.com!a16ni6498ign.0!nntp.google.com!j8no728852igd.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Original-Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.help In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=117.195.37.190; posting-account=mBpa7woAAAAGLEWUUKpmbxm-Quu5D8ui Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 117.195.37.190 User-Agent: G2/1.0 Injection-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2015 18:12:46 +0000 Original-Xref: usenet.stanford.edu gnu.emacs.help:212944 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:105229 Archived-At: On Saturday, June 27, 2015 at 11:14:38 PM UTC+5:30, Emanuel Berg wrote: > Rusi writes: > > >> %% (replace-regexp "^\\(.*&.*&\\).*&\\(.*\\)" > >> "\\1\\2") > > > > 51 chars (ignoring that things like ^& are shift > > chords) > > > > F3 C-s & RET C-SPC C-s C-s RET C-w C-a C-n F4 > > > > 16 keystrokes counting each chord as 1 1/2 keys > > Elisp is by definition better because everything you > can do with keyboard macros, you can do with Elisp - > but not even remotely so the other way around. Except that sometimes more is less http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/leastPower.html > > When you have done something with Elisp, you can save > that for future use. So also macros (info "(emacs)save keyboard macro") > What it is is clearly defined and easy to read and edit. Readability is like beauty -- in the eye of the beholder. [As my earlier example showed, emacs regexps can be ghastly] > Not only that, if it is modular, as it should, you can use it for other, > unexpected things in the future. Sure... (E)lisp is neat; doesn't mean its always relevant or appropriate