Re: EmacsW32 invocation options

[Hadron <hadronquark@gmail.com>]

Brian Elmegaard <brian@rkspeed-rugby.dk> writes:

> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>
>>> From: Brian Elmegaard <brian@rkspeed-rugby.dk>
>>> Date: Wed, 02 May 2007 07:01:44 +0100
>>> 
>>> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>>> 
>>> > So not only is your Emacs patched and behaves differently, it also
>>> > teaches users habits that will prevent them from using the same .emacs
>>> > on other systems?  I find this disturbing.
>>> 
>>> Why do users like to have to start emacs server themselves?
>>
>> I didn't say they like this.  
>
> I see.
>
> So I took a look at the manual. The manual for some reason is focused
> on unix:    
> "As an alternative to using `emacsclient', the file `etc/emacs.bash'
> defines a Bash command `edit' which will communicate with a running
> Emacs session, or start one if none exist."

As a relative convert back to emacs (I used back in the early 90s) I
agree with you. I remember back then when I moved to PCs I found it
incredibly frustrating to get emacs working under window. Whether its
because of missing paths, lack of bash, lack of documentation I don't
know/cant remember. I think any move to facilitate emacs use under
windows for nOObs can only be a good thing so long as that the basic
platform independent manual is not made redundant. Lennart's "additions"
should probably be totally done in a single line autoload in the basic
.emacs so that it can be simply unplugged.  Maybe it is.

>
> Afaics this is similar to what Lennart does for w32, but I may be
> wrong. 
> To me this indicates that there might be a reason for making something
> easier for windows people, too. 
>
> In my experience emacsW32 is a very nice customization for my use of
> emacs and it is easier for me to make our students get going with
> emacs. 

In SW there are always those who prefer not to do rather than do because
then there is no risk of the apple cart being upset. This attitude can
pay dividends in the long run. "Half assed" solutions to "partial
problems" often come and bite one in the ass at a later date. I suspect
people are worried that W32Emacs might be just such a venture. There is
already too much confusion in the emacs world - try looking for a
php-mode a cscope interface - it's a version nightmare with everyone
maintaining their own versions. One of the few the drawbacks of open source
IMO.

As far as the issue which sparked it, my partial ignorance on the
internal workings of emacs might well bar me from commenting. However,
casting a dis partial eye of the issue it seems fairly obvious to me for
the "single machine" issue. If (server-start) is able to start a server,
then I see no reason why emacsclient cant glean the same "parameters"
and start it itself if it is not running. I assume emacs server can also
run on a remote machine?  If so then the start parameters would, I
guess, be different. I don't know.

I think the bottom line is that any improvements should be cautiously
welcomed.

Certainly Lennart's xhtml stuff is way and above better than the
incomplete and buggy bits and pieces that were lying around in various
incarnations for editing mixed mode php/css/html/xhtml files. It got to
a stage where I wondered if anyone in the whole world was actually using
emacs to edit such files. Nearly ever readme I found indicated a
different "branch" of php-mode or html-helper and then went on to say
things like "may not work with x", "not sure if it will work for
you". So, I for one am grateful for Lennart's work on this issue
anyway. Is it perfect? No way. Is it better than went before? Yes. Is
Lennart open to suggestions for improvement from the people who actually
use it? Yes.