From: Chad Perrin <perrin@...>
Date: 2007-03-20T06:53:47+09:00
Subject: Re: SciTE Alternatives

On Tue, Mar 20, 2007 at 06:50:06AM +0900, David Kastrup wrote:
> "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <znmeb@cesmail.net> writes:
> 
> > Vim is about as heavy as Emacs these days, although if you learned
> > the old "vi", you can for the most part ignore all the stuff that's
> > been tacked on. For that matter, both Emacs and its forked cousin
> > XEmacs have a Notepad-like mouse interface and will run on Linux,
> > Windows, Macs, Solaris and probably BSD variants as well. For that
> > matter, though, so does Vim's "gvim" variant. (Notepad, mouse,
> > Linux, Windows, Mac, Solaris and probably BSD).
> >
> > Editors, IDEs, etc. seem to be converging to something that almost
> > any programmer can walk up to and use.
> 
> Disagree.  Only very few Emacs users nowadays use Emacs on a tty, and
> only very few vim users use the graphical "gvim" variant.
> 
> So I don't see convergence.

Good point.

I think that many IDEs are converging on a single design philosophy, to
some extent -- with outliers that buck the trends of course (both good
and bad examples).  Other code editing tools, however, are not
converging, either with IDEs or each other.

-- 
CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
"A script is what you give the actors.  A program
is what you give the audience." - Larry Wall