Re: Good Lisp editor for Win

On Jul 15, 8:58 pm, t...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (Thomas A. Russ) wrote:
Slobodan Blazeski <slobodan.blaze...@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
On Jul 14, 6:31  pm, t...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (Thomas A. Russ) wrote:
Jacobite1607 <Jacobite1...@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
On Jul 5, 4:39 pm, Francogrex <fra...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

references to Emacs. In all honesty I tried Emacs and I hate it,

I didn't care for emacs either. To me it seemed unnatural, largely
because Windows has certain standard keystrokes that are second
natural, Emacs went away from those and in the process was awkward.

Hmmm.   Interesting case of reverse causation.

Emacs was created in 1976
MSDOS was created in 1981
Windows was create in 1983 (1985?)

So, who went away from whom?
Who cares. History is written by the winners, windows won the war,
windows decides what is standard and what's not.

I wasn't arguing about what people consider standard.  I was objecting
to the characterization of Emacs choosing not to follow the standard,
when, if fact, Emacs had its keys standardized long before Windows.

Now, if the OP had said something neutral like "Emacs doesn't use the
standard Windows key bindings and seems awkward to Windows users", there
wouldn't really be a point of discussion.

People don't want changes. Ctrl-Z means undo and it should mean undo
on emacs BY DEFAULT or it'll be thrashed by masses of people who are
used to Ctrl-Z meaning undo.

Well, it's always difficult to argue for a change to the standard
behavior of a program that will have the effect of breaking the habits
of the established user group in the hope of making it easier or new
adopters.  It can be done, but it will have the effect of annoying all
of the existing users.

And there is the C-U-A mode easily available to change that.

The problem is that windows users don't want to customize a thing, it
works on default by our *beloved* installer or unzipper or it's
thrash. So maybe that C-U-A mode installed BY DEFAULT just for the
Windows distro would make things run smoother.

Besides, on my computer the control keys all belong to Emacs.  And I
still get to use Command-Z, Command-C, etc. with their standard
meanings.  But then again, I like to have nice, solid, usable software
and operating systems, even if it means not using the most popular
choices.
The problem is what the word usable means to you. Not being able to
play games , being forced into software renderer (I'm *happy* ATI GPU
user), cheap looking desktop environment (KDE looks great but
KUBUNTU has too many bugs for my taste) , using poor man alternatives
(like Totem vs Winamp ) , or being forced to jump through hoops to do
some trivial tasks like printing something (no Canon drivers for
Ubuntu just RedHat ) or go to temp folder to copy youtube videos and
paste them into somewhere while real player does needs only a click in
my browser.
I know that ATI and Canon are bastards for not providing drivers for
Ubuntu. I feel bad that Winamp and Real don't offer Linux edition
for their players (Real for linux is joke, nothing to do with win
version except the name) .
And I would like game studios tp use OpenGL instead of DX so they
could play well on linux, but I can't change them. The only thing I
can change is my OS.

People don't want t be corrected. Sure your comments are valid and
logical but humans aren't logical.  Who wrote The Man Who Sold the
World ? Nirvana . Wrong it's a David Bowie's song. But correct
somebody and they'll say that you're wrong, and when you point them to
your sources they will hate you.  Or start the baseline of Under
Pressure and everybody sings Ice ice baby. Truth matters the least,
unless it some strong law that reminds humans about reality everytime
they try something foolish (like  Gravity). And History doesn't have
that power.

Well, this is perhaps a generally valid observation of human behavior.
On the other hand, surrendering the truth just because it is
inconvenient seems to me to be a bad philosophy to want to follow.  
It's sad affair, but it seems truth is really hard to defend. Week ago
on a party people started talking all kind of supernatural thrash
ranging from homeopathy through people never landed on the Moon right
to we're using 5% of our brain so if we could use 30% we'll be able to
teleport, theory of evolution is invalid. Whenever I stated facts
about the matters as they are, and thanks god we had an internet
connection, they retreated just to start another garbage 2 minutes
later. Now I realize that people wants to be deceived, showing them
the truth is right way to make yourself look bad. People suck, Dogbert
rules.

http://homepage.eircom.net/%257Eodyssey/Quotes/Popular/Comics/Dilbert.html
http://www.nikkanen.org/dilbert/Insult.jpg
http://kerstein.org/dilbert/dilbert_internet_porn.jpg
http://kerstein.org/dilbert/dogbert_helpdesk.jpg
http://ldc.upenn.edu/myl/llog/DilbertDogbertTheConsultant.gif
http://www.ginside.com/content/2007/12/comic-dogbert-tech-support.jpg
http://delab.csd.auth.gr/~alex/dogbert.jpg
http://kerstein.org/dilbert/dogbert-network-admin.jpg
http://kerstein.org/dilbert/dilbert_dogbert_techsupport.jpg
http://www.awgibbs.com/images/dogbert_on_education.gif
http://bp0.blogger.com/_LbhpIVNcizI/RcEOCh9H1oI/AAAAAAAAAPM/9eLxeRuVcVk/s400/dilbert20024435370117.gif



The
disparagement of "the reality-based community" in some political circles
seems to me to be a really insidious and evil development.

Not to mention that it flies in the face of the basic tenets of the
scientific process.

--
Thomas A. Russ,  USC/Information Sciences Institute- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

.