From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: Emacs terminology (not again!?) [was: Apologia for bzr] Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2014 08:44:38 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <34c8c13b-c5c6-4e5a-9248-b09d5d1936da@default> References: <877gact76s.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1389289186 23003 80.91.229.3 (9 Jan 2014 17:39:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2014 17:39:46 +0000 (UTC) To: =?iso-8859-1?B?UGVyIFN0YXJi5GNr?= , emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jan 09 18:39:52 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1W1JaB-0007Sf-Fy for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2014 18:39:51 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53310 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W1JaB-00054l-5o for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2014 12:39:51 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53436) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W1Iiw-0005Zs-G9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2014 11:44:57 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W1Iip-0008Pf-4y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2014 11:44:50 -0500 Original-Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:26004) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W1Iio-0008Pa-Tt for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2014 11:44:43 -0500 Original-Received: from acsinet22.oracle.com (acsinet22.oracle.com [141.146.126.238]) by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1) with ESMTP id s09GieJC017666 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 9 Jan 2014 16:44:41 GMT Original-Received: from aserz7022.oracle.com (aserz7022.oracle.com [141.146.126.231]) by acsinet22.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s09Gicmg008821 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 9 Jan 2014 16:44:39 GMT Original-Received: from abhmp0004.oracle.com (abhmp0004.oracle.com [141.146.116.10]) by aserz7022.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s09GicQp008814; Thu, 9 Jan 2014 16:44:38 GMT In-Reply-To: X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.8 (707110) [OL 12.0.6680.5000 (x86)] X-Source-IP: acsinet22.oracle.com [141.146.126.238] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4.x-2.6.x [generic] X-Received-From: 156.151.31.81 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:167948 Archived-At: >>> users can get the impression that Emacs is not for them because it's we= ird. >>> If they in just the first half hour of using Emacs meet several such th= ings >>> they may conclude that working with Emacs will continue to be like this= ; >>> now and then it will turn out that it doesn't work as "expected" and th= at >>> there are new names for everything, etc. =A0Why not use That Other Edit= or >>> that some other people suggested instead? >> >> Why not, indeed? =A0Problem solved. > > Then you are talking about another problem than I am. Functionality (and > attitudes) that turn away those people is indeed a problem for Emacs. Are you sure that turning away "those people" is a problem for Emacs? >> (And _you_ are not using That Other Editor why? =A0Did you perhaps >> spend more than 1/2 hour learning This Old Editor?) > > This seems irrelevant to me. What is your point? Emacs _is_ a better mousetrap. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Build_a_better_mousetrap,_and_the_world_will_b= eat_a_path_to_your_door To really appreciate it, some people, if not most, need to give it more than 1/2 hour, before jumping to the conclusion that it is not worth their spending more time with it. As Richard put it, "Learning Emacs is never going to be easy." Or as I said: Learning Emacs is learning something new and different - it is not your momma's editor. And it rightfully has its own terminology. "Those people" who don't feel they need to bother - well, they will either get it later, by way of others, or they will not. Tant pis. Emacs losing out because Eclipse or whatever offers more code-refactoring (or whatever) power, out of the box - that's one thing. Emacs has room for improvement in lots of areas, no doubt about that. But Emacs being "weird" because it uses the word "window" differently - that's another thing. I have never encountered a newbie taking Emacs for a test drive who could not understand, when told what an Emacs window is. Have you? But yes, it might take more than 1/2 hour for Emacs to introduce itself properly to a user. ("Hello there, I'm GNU Emacs. Who are you?") This isn't a cocktail party! But even if it were, there are some people who, if given the opportunity, would give up in 5 minutes after being introduced to the likes of , even if they spoke the same language. Some people are unfortunately "those people". Other things being equal, of course we want to make things easy to learn. Of course we do not want to throw up unnecessary obstacles. Gratuitous differences in terminology for identical things should be dealt with - and they generally are. But (a) that is rare (the Emacs thingies are not really the same), and (b) even then it is not important to toe the line. Especially if the things are identical, it is easy to learn new terms for them. The Emacs UI and doc have been dealing with this for almost 4 decades now. It does take at least a few minutes and a few examples to get the notion and behavior of an Emacs "buffer". Weird! Not what you're used to. Give it a little time. A better mousetrap - you'll see. That kind of hand-holding encouragement is fine. But there is no reason to underestimate potential users. Some people will give up without giving Emacs a chance. So what? Others will not - just as you did not. Why suppose that potential Emacs users are less patient or curious or intelligent than we are?