> references to Emacs. In all honesty I tried Emacs and I hate it, it's
> bulky and "unix like", I really do not want to use it to run common
> lisp from it.
have you tried XEmacs? it's equipped with traditional Windows key bindings,
and feels almost like another editor on Windows. (I've used to a way how
select/copy/paste works on Windows, say in Visual Studio, so default
Emacs keybindings are pain for me, i understand why you hate it).
also XEmacs seems to be a bit nicer and most of stuff can be configured
via menu. (i can be wrong, but Emacs version i've seen look like
unfriendly old turd comparing to XEmacs). (on the bad side people
say XEmacs is somewhat less stable and some plugins do not work on it).
On Sun, 06 Jul 2008 16:03:06 +0300, "Alex Mizrahi" <············@gmail.com>
tried to confuse everyone with this message:
>> references to Emacs. In all honesty I tried Emacs and I hate it, it's
>> bulky and "unix like", I really do not want to use it to run common
>> lisp from it.
>
>have you tried XEmacs? it's equipped with traditional Windows key bindings,
>and feels almost like another editor on Windows. (I've used to a way how
>select/copy/paste works on Windows, say in Visual Studio, so default
>Emacs keybindings are pain for me, i understand why you hate it).
>
>also XEmacs seems to be a bit nicer and most of stuff can be configured
>via menu. (i can be wrong, but Emacs version i've seen look like
>unfriendly old turd comparing to XEmacs). (on the bad side people
>say XEmacs is somewhat less stable and some plugins do not work on it).
As far as I'm aware, GNU Emacs completely supersedes XEmacs on Windows as of
late. Here's Steve Yegge's post on this topic:
http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2008/04/xemacs-is-dead-long-live-xemacs.html
--
|Don't believe this - you're not worthless ,gr---------.ru
|It's us against millions and we can't take them all... | ue il |
|But we can take them on! | @ma |
| (A Wilhelm Scream - The Rip) |______________|