From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: What's your favourite *under_publicized* editing feature ofEmacs? Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 21:04:02 +0100 Organization: Organization?!? Message-ID: <87aahghqod.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> References: <87ei6zpbor.fsf@rapttech.com.au> <2p8vx4550z.fsf@shell.xmission.com> <87lj11dhm9.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <87pqqda3a4.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <87d3md89mh.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <87pqqclc38.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1298926935 1828 80.91.229.12 (28 Feb 2011 21:02:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 21:02:15 +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 Feb 28 22:02:08 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PuAEG-0007jX-IO for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 28 Feb 2011 22:02:04 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56676 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Pu9up-0002qc-AH for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 28 Feb 2011 15:41:59 -0500 Original-Path: usenet.stanford.edu!news.glorb.com!news2.glorb.com!news2.arglkargh.de!noris.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool4.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail Original-Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp,gnu.emacs.help,comp.emacs X-Face: 2FEFf>]>q>2iw=B6, xrUubRI>pR&Ml9=ao@P@i)L:\urd*t9M~y1^:+Y]'C0~{mAl`oQuAl \!3KEIp?*w`|bL5qr,H)LFO6Q=qx~iH4DN; i"; /yuIsqbLLCh/!U#X[S~(5eZ41to5f%E@'ELIi$t^ Vc\LWP@J5p^rst0+('>Er0=^1{]M9!p?&:\z]|;&=NP3AhB!B_bi^]Pfkw User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:MRe6ErhmLLx0kTDwqDLM0SDRcww= Original-Lines: 49 Original-NNTP-Posting-Date: 28 Feb 2011 21:04:05 CET Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 1f5e942e.newsspool1.arcor-online.net Original-X-Trace: DXC=XfR>DC[mJ]EC4i^e1BZ=_Hic==]BZ:afN4Fo<]lROoRA<`=YMgDjhgB`IFg:9DCNkBQF2\gH8m9HI^9QSCVg3dOFPXAdj3Ee7^H; =oCYH8_clKS\3Ua6h<6>H Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de Original-Xref: usenet.stanford.edu comp.lang.lisp:300082 gnu.emacs.help:185432 comp.emacs:101182 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:79586 Archived-At: Cthun writes: > On 28/02/2011 4:53 AM, David Kastrup wrote: >> Stefan Monnier writes: >> >>>>>>> This is nothing to do with being an academic. What happens when, for >>>>>>> instance, a novel is being published? The author sends it to the >>>>>>> publisher, who sends back a copy with various changes, which the author >>>>>>> then either accepts, accepts in some modified form, or rejects. This >>>>>>> process is then iterated several times. >>>>>> And this process does not involve a CVS repository. >>>>> With me, it nowadays usually involves a git repository. I used CVS >>>>> previously, but that is less convenient. >>>> You're insane. I should say _that_ would be an unsubstantiated claim. Though being insane might have something to do with Lisp. >>> No > > What does Monnier's classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have > to do with Lisp, Kastrup? > >> I do this for work I do quite by myself (like theses and articles). > > How odd. Not at all. >> Makes it much easier to keep track of work you do. > > What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have to do > with Lisp, Kastrup? Using version control software entails a lot of > complex use of command-line tools to check out, copy, and check in > files, Kastrup, That's why one uses a Lisp-based editor with version-control support called Emacs to do the hard work. > and that's after scaling the software's learning curve. This hardly > seems likely to be "much easier" than just using a word processor like > normal folk, Kastrup. Your discussion style (or rather your apodictic statement style) does not suggest that you would be able to speak for normal folk with authority. -- David Kastrup