From: Chad Perrin <perrin@...>
Date: 2007-07-22T09:53:44+09:00
Subject: Re: [OT] Re: Ruby Editor

On Sun, Jul 22, 2007 at 08:44:40AM +0900, Dan Zwell wrote:
> Alexandru E. Ungur wrote:
> >You can also extend vim in one of
> >vimscript, python, *ruby*, tcl and/or mzscheme... so I really don't
> >think Emacs is more customizable than Vim.
> 
> That is precisely why I think Emacs is more customizable than Vim. Elisp 
> is capable of controlling every aspect of the program, as I understand 
> it. All plugins are in Elisp, and many of them can play nice together or 
> extend each other. By running a few lines of elisp, I have even 
> (accidentally) changed functions that were necessary to save or exit! 
> (Like I said earlier, extreme customizability is not always an 
> advantage. But if you like that sort of thing...)
> 
> With Vim, you have to delve into vimscript if you want to have complete 
> control of the editor (or so I've read). Further, many plugins are 
> written (mostly) in ruby, python, vimscript, etc. If you want to modify 
> a plugin, it will inevitably not be written in a language that you are 
> comfortable with. (Maybe others have had more luck with Vim plugins than 
> me.)

I'm not sure that tracks.  You consider Emacs to be more customizable
because all the plugins are written in Elisp, but you consider Vim less
customizable because you have to know vimscript to write plugins.  Am I
reading what you're saying correctly?

So . . . how are those two things different from one another?

(leaving aside for the moment the ability to write significant chunks of
plugin code in other languages -- which I think is present in both, but
more obvious and common with Vim)

-- 
CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
Baltasar Gracian: "A wise man gets more from his enemies than a fool from
his friends."