From owner-freebsd-questions Mon May 21 16:18:37 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from guru.mired.org (okc-65-26-235-186.mmcable.com [65.26.235.186]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 96B6037B422 for ; Mon, 21 May 2001 16:18:33 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mwm@mired.org) Received: (qmail 24368 invoked by uid 100); 21 May 2001 23:18:31 -0000 From: Mike Meyer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15113.41543.275053.74528@guru.mired.org> Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 18:18:31 -0500 To: dochawk@psu.edu Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: how much ram/cpu/swap to run emacs/xemacs effectively? In-Reply-To: <200105212032.f4LKWA584023@fac13.ds.psu.edu> References: <15113.30811.116486.126146@guru.mired.org> <200105212032.f4LKWA584023@fac13.ds.psu.edu> X-Mailer: VM 6.90 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`;h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG dochawk@psu.edu types: > mike mumbled, > > > dochawk@psu.edu types: > > > jonathon jubilated, :) > > > > On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 10:34:31AM -0400, dochawk@psu.edu wrote: > > > We'll leave the One True Editor out of this :) Besides, I've wimped > > > out and used its visual descendant . . . > > What? you mean you don't switch between all three almost at random? > > Being able to use the best tool for the job is important. > not any more. I don't remember the last time I used ed instead of vi, > so these days it's primarily vi, with emacs used to write code the first > time, realign code from time to tome, and use mh over a text connection. I still use ed fairly relularly for the one-line fix to config files and the like. Even on today's machines, redrawing the screen two or three times is starting ed. > Then again, I've never quite trusted machines since we stopped entering > bootstrap code . . . What? You don't trust bootstrap code store on the RL02? > > I wonder what happened to qed? > someone tried to demonstrate a fale proposition? :) qed was ed on steroids. Not quote to ed as emacs is to vi, but not far from it. It was even had hooks to support being a login shell. > > > tries to do absolutely everything, > > Tries? Ok, it doesn't run 3d gas flow models very well, but if you've > > got xemacs, you don't need Netscape, GNOME, KDE, XFree86-4 etc. and > > it's smaller than them to boot. > GNOME? KDE? Why would I want those? :) I've got to allocate the mere > 512mb in my laptop carefully . . . If you've got emacs, I don't know why you would want those. > > > and downright hostile to the standards used by everything else . . . > > Nah, it'll run on Windows as well as Unix. > ahh, so it's hostile to standards, and hostile to those hostile to > standards. Is that uber-hostile or meta-hostile? > > hawk, grimacing in advance for the escape-puns that the last line will > generate I think the whole thing is alt-hostile. http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message