From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Riley Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: "like other editors" [ Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2011 18:00:35 +0200 Organization: aich tea tea pea dicky riley dot net Message-ID: References: <87litcvtu2.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <20111003093334.0bf5d988@kuru.homelinux.net> <4E89B613.9060305@mousecar.com> Reply-To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1317657684 1441 80.91.229.12 (3 Oct 2011 16:01:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 16:01:24 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Oct 03 18:01:20 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RAkx9-0004SL-SR for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 03 Oct 2011 18:01:16 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41787 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RAkx9-0000cT-FN for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 03 Oct 2011 12:01:15 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:41012) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RAkx0-0000Oi-FT for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 03 Oct 2011 12:01:08 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RAkwr-00052w-W2 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 03 Oct 2011 12:01:06 -0400 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:53962) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RAkwr-00052k-JK for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 03 Oct 2011 12:00:57 -0400 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RAkwl-0004Dn-D7 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 03 Oct 2011 18:00:51 +0200 Original-Received: from 85.183.18.158 ([85.183.18.158]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 03 Oct 2011 18:00:51 +0200 Original-Received: from rileyrg by 85.183.18.158 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 03 Oct 2011 18:00:51 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-Lines: 91 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 85.183.18.158 Mail-Copies-To: never User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:wXkVXHd0bWLp4BcAV5V2NfF+WYw= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 80.91.229.12 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:82417 Archived-At: ken writes: >> [Making this change] brings default Emacs behaviour close >> to other modern text editors. .... > > This is an invalid argument, more an appeal to fashion than an appeal > to reason. A little tongue in check but ... Having to change common UI motions from app to app is a pain. While I agree not all things should be embraced more recent changes like how select, mark and clipboards work make it FAR easier for the newer adopter : hard core users are more than able to customise back to the 1994 "standard" they prefer as the previous poster mentioned. Always try to remember the hassles you had when embracing emacs. Only then can you judge more dispassionately. If you have no interest in making emacs more palatable for new users then also fine : but that point needs to be made obvious. But many people do : hence efforts like the starter kit and el-get and so forth. > When switching from one application to another, we shouldn't expect the new one > to behave just like the former one. They are different pieces of software, > after all. When you start using different software, you should expect that it > will operate differently. You should expect that you'll have to learn new > things. > > Secondly, there are places in the world where people haven't ever used > Windows; Yes, but in the real world... Most people have and do. and emacs runs on Windows. This isnt a Linux v Windows fanoi bun fight ;) > instead, their first and only experience with computers is with Linux. What > sense can it make to them that emacs' behavior is changed simply to mimic some > other editor they've never seen or used? emacs is not "Linux". Gnu/Linux has desktop editors which all share trends virtually identically to how the Windows equivalents do in the massive majority of cases. > > I think that over the long term it will trend upwards that more people's first > and only computer experience will be with FOSS. So thinking ahead to those > times, why should we alter the default behavior of Emacs to conform to a legacy > editor? Modern FOSS editors invariably conform to common desktop UI paradigms and key strokes. Not that I advocate changing core keys necessarily. > > Fourth, if we apply your argument to every difference between Emacs and (e.g.) > Word, then we end up with Emacs behaving just like Word, and there being no > difference between Emacs and Word. Then we might as well just use > Word. :/ But no one is suggesting Emacs is made into Word. Total Strawman. > > Fifth, if we change emacs to comport with Word, and if in future Word changes > the way it handles highlighted text to way emacs does now, should emacs then > change back again, just to (again) follow the way Word works? Strawman now taken to far, far extremes... Word is not an "editor" in the context of this thread. Its a wysiwig word processor. And that said, certain wysiwig elements in emacs are VERY popular. See LaTeX support for a start. > > Finally, as said at the top, the argument to follow "other modern editors" is > nothing more than an appeal to fashion. And fashion is very > subjective and No it isnt. Its to follow and conform to other apps many people use and have developed over many years too and conform to modern desktop standards. > capricious. We should no more change emacs simply to comport with some other, > even (currently) more popular software than you and I and all the other guys on > this list should start dressing ourselves like the cool dudes on whatever soap > opera is the most popular these days. > > Let's just talk about what makes sense. You dont think emacs sharing certain features with much more popular editors might be a good idea and makes sense?