Re: Emacs Book Vs Emacs Manuals

[Emanuel Berg <embe8573@student.uu.se>]

Rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> writes:

> Readability is like beauty -- in the eye of the
> beholder. [As my earlier example showed, emacs
> regexps can be ghastly]

I actually think both keyboard macros and regexps as
a method of editing code are bad (both almost as bad,
but regexps are still a bit better because they can be
read, and the skills you get are usable elsewhere).

But both are bad in the sense they solve problems by
rearranging code according to patterns which almost
turn the code into something graphical! Or to be
precise, the methods are not bad but good but my code
never looks like that. If there are patterns to the
code those should be expressed by other means - not as
ASCII art!

So I ask again, next time you use this with real
technology like Lisp, C, C++, zsh, SQL, even groff,
LaTeX, just about anything that I know that would be
interesting to see.

I have only seen one example so far and there
I disagree: I think the Elisp one-liner is the best
solution by far.

-- 
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573