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: AW: delete-selection-mode Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 14:54:48 +0100 Organization: Organization?!? Message-ID: <87eijj6ok7.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> References: <87ocitw2dl.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <201003130001.o2D01FFQ003489@godzilla.ics.uci.edu> <87vdd1yqe4.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87eijjzrkd.fsf_-_@mail.jurta.org> <874okf8dep.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <7697A57B1AD9104F993CDF6A5B69430C0A70E50872@CORPMAIL08.corp.capgemini.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1268834129 16056 80.91.229.12 (17 Mar 2010 13:55:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 13:55:29 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 17 14:55:22 2010 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 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NrtiU-0002Sp-Ek for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 14:55:22 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60842 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NrtiT-0005Tg-Va for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 09:55:22 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NrtiN-0005S2-Lr for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 09:55:15 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=35240 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NrtiM-0005Qp-84 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 09:55:15 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NrtiK-00010P-CO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 09:55:14 -0400 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:39912) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NrtiK-00010E-1k for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 09:55:12 -0400 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NrtiH-0002L6-Aw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 14:55:09 +0100 Original-Received: from p5b2c22cc.dip.t-dialin.net ([91.44.34.204]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 14:55:09 +0100 Original-Received: from dak by p5b2c22cc.dip.t-dialin.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 14:55:09 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 37 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: p5b2c22cc.dip.t-dialin.net 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/23.1.92 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:1JcGQSc9nxBRKZJMLumocwzP4yM= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/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:122091 Archived-At: "Berndl, Klaus" writes: > Since Emacs editing interferes with typical editing commands today my > vote is "yes". > > Of course this is a little bit provoking, so please do not feel > offened! > > But IMHO the following is fact: Today Emacs has very strong > competitors concerning "what is the most effective way to code my > programs" - a lot of (commercial or free or open source) so called > IDEs have adopted some of the pure editing power of Emacs but offer on > top some power Emacs still lacks today, as for example real, fast and > powerful refactoring, code navigation and other goodies you need much > more for effective Code-development than some certain > Emacs-specials. If they offer real, fast and powerful refactoring, code navigation and other goodies, then the way to compete with them is to add powerful refactoring, code navigation and other goodies to Emacs. If we make Emacs the same as them, only worse, that won't help us. Efficient user interaction is one area that Emacs is good in, partly due to long discussions and diligent and carefully planned changes of semantics. Why should we sacrifice that before the problems in connection with normal user operation have found solutions? Emacs has useful syntax highlighting, useful transient marks, useful GUI integration, in particular when compared with the "pathbreaker" XEmacs, and part of the reason is that those features were not enabled until the problems around them have found satisfactory solutions. "Everybody else does it" is no substitute for efficient and useful semantics. -- David Kastrup