From: Chad Perrin <perrin@...>
Date: 2007-07-23T06:04:10+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby Editor

On Mon, Jul 23, 2007 at 03:05:11AM +0900, aks wrote:
> 
> IMHO, the strength of "vi" ("vim", "nvi", etc.) are that it is the
> best at "word processing" -- editing chunks of text, with a minimum of
> keyboard input, and without having to use a mouse.  While, in
> contrast, the strength of "emacs" is that it can easily be extended in
> very useful ways to accomplish things that are not normally
> accomplished within an "editor".  For example, take a look at  "orgtbl-
> mode.el", "table.el", "calendar.el", and, most amazingly, the
> "calculator.el" mode.

For such things, I tend to use other tools.  I want my text processor for
processing text, and other tools for other purposes.  For instance, I use
irb as my calculator.

> 
> The reason I bring these modules up is that, if you are concerned (as
> some previously have stated) with the viability of your editing
> environment, and consider TextMate not suitable because you don't
> trust that their development will support their product as long as you
> want to develop using it, then you may wish to consider using either a
> vi clone with a ruby extension, or Emacs with these standard ruby
> modules, or Emacs with these ruby modules AND viper-mode.  Both vi and
> emacs (not the extensions) are open-source, and have been around
> longer than most of you (but not me -- I started writing assembly code
> on Univac mainframes in the early 70s, before Emacs was even a glimmer
> in Stallman's eyes ;)

I was around before both -- though, admittedly, I wasn't programming yet.


> 
> Now, perhaps we can discuss Ruby stuff again.. ;-)

See above, re: irb instead of emacs as my calculator.

-- 
CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
Brian K. Reid: "In computer science, we stand on each other's feet."