From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs vista build failures Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 16:04:03 +0200 Message-ID: <86mykaggmk.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> References: <36366a980807101702r5677d096g8e62ef5b3e278868@mail.gmail.com> <87k5fph5rh.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <20080713214648.GB1076@muc.de> <20080714195651.GF3445@muc.de> <487C5FA3.4070603@emf.net> <87zloggji9.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <878wvxxkn6.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <87ej5oz4pb.fsf@saeurebad.de> <87vdyzxype.fsf@saeurebad.de> <871w1njq32.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <87iquzxgtk.fsf@saeurebad.de> <4884CFEF.8040404@gmail.com> <87ej5nxew2.fsf@saeurebad.de> <87wsje37rg.fsf@saeurebad.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1216735523 13447 80.91.229.12 (22 Jul 2008 14:05:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 14:05:23 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Johannes Weiner , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 22 16:06:11 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KLIUI-0001Ic-4F for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 16:05:33 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41487 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KLITO-0002Vy-Rp for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 10:04:14 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KLITI-0002UV-Al for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 10:04:08 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KLITG-0002Ty-O7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 10:04:08 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=59212 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KLITG-0002Tv-Ip for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 10:04:06 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.quinscape.de ([212.29.44.217]:54923) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KLITF-0004yQ-U9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 10:04:06 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail-ldap/ctrl 32029 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2008 14:04:04 -0000 Original-Received: from unknown (HELO lola.quinscape.zz) ([10.0.3.43]) (envelope-sender ) by quinx.quinscape.de (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 22 Jul 2008 14:04:03 -0000 Original-Received: by lola.quinscape.zz (Postfix, from userid 1001) id A5285E1E79; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 16:04:03 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Tue, 22 Jul 2008 09:28:23 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) X-AntiVirus: checked by AntiVir MailGate (version: 2.1.3-2; AVE: 7.8.1.11; VDF: 7.0.5.151; host: quinx) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:101198 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> From: Johannes Weiner >> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org >> Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 05:41:39 +0200 >> >> What is your point? > > That if you put politics aside, there's nothing left to make GNU/Linux > be much better than Windows. Politics is what makes it stand out. I've programmed both extensively. And Windows really is a time sink with its wagonload of inconsistencies. The company I am currently working with is rather Windows-centric. After about half a year of offering our main product on Windows as well, we abandoned the effort. The level of inconsistencies and problems when doing, say, batch file programming is really staggering, and we were continually getting tripped up by further little niceties and problems. Just a small example (stripped to the part of interest): REM Get current directory set targetdir=%CD% REM %targetdir% has to be postprocessed since if it is a root directory, REM it will end in a backslash which escapes a double quote when calling REM Java. So we append a single dot in that case. for %%l in (%targetdir%) do if "%%~pnl" == "\" (set targetdir=%targetdir%.) call ant.bat -Dinstaller.path="%targetdir%" Can you imagine how many mandays get wasted on utterly appalling workarounds like that? And of course, this just works on one version of cmd.exe, and might break on another. Bourne shell programming is _much_ more consistent, regular, and simple. Quite fewer commands, quite more uniform constructs, quite more power, quite fewer exceptions and bad surprises. And that's when I am talking about seventies level Bourne shell programming. Of course, Windows bashing has become a popular sport. But it is not all politics and arbitrary. There are reasons, technical reasons (not "just" that it is unfree) that Windows gets bashed and loathed. After all, there _are_ non-free Unix versions a dime (or was that a million?) a dozen. And it is not just a _different_ design that is getting the heat, but pretty much the absence of much of a design and stupidity and awkwardness that is hobbling productivity in utterly staggering ways. This list certainly is not the place to discuss the presence or absence of merits in Windows. But if we get a bit more Emacs-specific and you take a look at conditional code being used when under all sort of UNIX systems and code being used when under w32, then take a good look at what code is more complex and awkward. -- David Kastrup