Real emacs at last.

Discussion in 'Mac Programming' started by iMeowbot, May 25, 2005.

  1. iMeowbot macrumors G3

    iMeowbot

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2003
    #1
  2. wnameth macrumors 65816

    wnameth

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2004
    Location:
    Canada
  3. yellow Moderator emeritus

    yellow

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #3
    Emacs is a very powerful text editor.
    Originally for UNIX (UNIX flavors) and later (more popularly, IMO) for X11.
     
  4. bousozoku Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    Gone but not forgotten.
    #4
    If it's not running in a shell, it's not real emacs. You people and your need to be coddled. j/k :D
     
  5. yellow Moderator emeritus

    yellow

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Location:
    Portland, OR
  6. bousozoku Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    Gone but not forgotten.
    #6
    You know what I mean. LISP = Lots of Inane Stupid Parentheses (or List Processor.)

    We didn't need a GUI to have editor windows. There were plenty of keyboard combinations but you could do anything with emacs. I could never get a warm and fuzzy feeling for vi or vim--they're awful, since they're based on ed.
     
  7. yellow Moderator emeritus

    yellow

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #7
    LOL! I've never heard it called that, but hells yes you are right.

    I am in the same boat. I used to have to edit Circle MUDs with ed. [shudder]. And vi.. well, let's just say I learned enough to :wq :)

    Remember, you can't spell evil without vi!
     
  8. stcanard macrumors 65816

    stcanard

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2003
    Location:
    Vancouver
    #8
    Ooh, them's fighting words!

    I used to be completely emacs, but the more I use it the more I'm getting to like vi. Fast, always available, and awesome search and replace capabilities.

    That is, as long as you don't go nuts when typing :%s/^MySearch/Otherstuff/

    I will admit on complex things I do fall back to the more user-friendly emacs.
     
  9. yellow Moderator emeritus

    yellow

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #9
    Me, I'm a lamewad.

    It's pico first, emacs second, wring my hands, stomp my feet, cry, beg, cry some more, eat a sandwich, vi.
     
  10. jim. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    C-ville, VA
    #10
    No! I thought I had finally escaped these fights! :D

    Jim
     
  11. ravenvii macrumors 604

    ravenvii

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2004
    Location:
    Melenkurion Skyweir
    #11
    Hmm, isn't emacs already included in OS X? And it doesn't require X11 either?

    I swear I played Tetris on it once... :)
     
  12. bousozoku Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    Gone but not forgotten.
    #12
    I'd rather use ed than vi. Actually, those of us who got involved in programming on the IBM PC early had to use edlin which was ed with a longer name.

    Raven VII:

    Yes, emacs is part of the developer tools in Mac OS X and works quite well but it doesn't have an GUI pieces and that really rattles some people's cages.
     
  13. mwpeters8182 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2003
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    #13
    I'm glad to see emacs is available for OS X, and it's not an X11 port. I've been using gvim at school for my coding, and TextWrangler at home (when I need to edit a thing or two), but maybe I'll try to switch to emacs, so things are the same on both sides.

    MP
     
  14. stcanard macrumors 65816

    stcanard

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2003
    Location:
    Vancouver
    #14
    You'll laugh, but I always get lost in Pico/Nano. I can never figure out how to save or exit.

    I do still far prefer emac's ability to split windows so easily, even when I'm in a terminal interface. It depends on what I'm doing -- quick and dirty = vi, anything more involved = emacs (or cursing that they didn't install it and back to vi).
     
  15. Loge macrumors 68020

    Loge

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2004
    Location:
    England
    #15
  16. iMeowbot thread starter macrumors G3

    iMeowbot

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2003
    #16
    Sort of, but the stock one was limited to use inside the terminal. This port is a real live Aqua program, so you can have multiple full-sized buffer windows open, the font lock that isn't half-baked and so on. And lots of menus if you don't feel like typing Escape-Meta-Alt-Control-Shift.

    I missed having a comfy place to run Gnus. This might even be enough to put Mail.app to bed.
     
  17. iMeowbot thread starter macrumors G3

    iMeowbot

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2003
    #17
    That's not a bad port, but it's based on an old version of emacs (20.7, about five years old now). The version skew becomes annoying when you want to use newer lisp packages.
     
  18. Loge macrumors 68020

    Loge

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2004
    Location:
    England
    #18
    True it's an older version, but seems to support more OS X features, at least "out of the box".

    Out of interest, how did you get the anti-aliased fonts that you mention in your first post?
     
  19. iMeowbot thread starter macrumors G3

    iMeowbot

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2003
    #19
    Oh, I see what you mean. You get the old Carbon-style anti-aliasing normally, but the newer OS X type if you have Silk installed.
     
  20. dav macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2004
    #20
    What is so evil about vi?

    It is efficient and I love it :)
     
  21. iMeowbot thread starter macrumors G3

    iMeowbot

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2003
    #21
    vi vi vi, the editor of the beast!
     
  22. bousozoku Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    Gone but not forgotten.
    #22
    To me, it's the worst editor on UNIX, ed is slightly better because it doesn't have pretensions of being something else. vi was originally just a shell for ed anyway.
     
  23. GeeYouEye macrumors 68000

    GeeYouEye

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2001
    Location:
    State of Denial
    #23
    SubEthaEdit for me if I can get away with it, then vim, then vi, then echo "..." > file.txt && (awk || sed), then emacs, then pico. As you might guess, I really don't like either emacs or pico, and emacs only a bit more because it's got tetris that i can play when i get frustrated trying to get the damn thing to work.
     
  24. stcanard macrumors 65816

    stcanard

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2003
    Location:
    Vancouver
    #24
    It definitely takes a different mindset. I do still find the switch between command and editing mode annoying (especially when you accidentally delete 1/2 your document because you started typing while in command mode).

    To me vi has one huge thing going for it. Wherever I am, on whatever unix or clone I am using, I can guarantee that vi is available. I started using it more and more out of habit just because of that, then finally started to get used to it. I used to hate it with a passion. Now that I've realized a lot of the navigation commands have roots in regex's (e.g. start of line is ^) its started getting easier.

    Heh, bet you never thought you'd see an evil vs. Eight-hundred Mb Always Swapping (yeah, I've updated it) argument on a Mac board. Boy OSX has sure changed things :)
     
  25. stcanard macrumors 65816

    stcanard

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2003
    Location:
    Vancouver
    #25
    It surprises me how often I still use cat > file.txt .... ^d to create things. Sometimes the fastest is still the best!
     

Share This Page