From: Chad Perrin <perrin@...>
Date: 2007-07-22T14:55:12+09:00
Subject: Re: [OT] Re: Ruby Editor

On Sun, Jul 22, 2007 at 10:21:56AM +0900, Peter Seebach wrote:
> In message <20070722005345.GD66157@demeter.hydra>, Chad Perrin writes:
> >(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)
> 
> I think emacs is more customizable for one simple reason:  vmlinux.el.
> 
> Emacs is an operating system in which someone wrote a popular programmer's
> editor.  Vim is an extensible editor.

I already have an OS.  I don't need to run another one on top of it.

The way I've heard the same sentiment phrased was "Emacs is a great OS.
Now someone needs to write a good editor for it."

Of course, there is a good editor for Emacs.  I think it's called Viper.


> 
> (Me, I use nvi.  It's not especially extensible, but then, I don't need to
> extend it; it does what I want and stays out of my face.)

I don't actually use extension in Vim, either, really.  I guess you could
call the syntax highlighting files for Vim extensions, though -- and I do
use those.

-- 
CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
Kent Beck: "I always knew that one day Smalltalk would replace Java.  I
just didn't know it would be called Ruby."