[29315] in Perl-Users-Digest
Perl-Users Digest, Issue: 559 Volume: 11
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Fri Jun 22 21:14:34 2007
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 18:14:12 -0700 (PDT)
From: Perl-Users Digest <Perl-Users-Request@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU>
To: Perl-Users@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Perl-Users Digest Fri, 22 Jun 2007 Volume: 11 Number: 559
Today's topics:
Re: The Modernization of Emacs: terminology buffer and <david.golden@oceanfree.net>
Re: The Modernization of Emacs: terminology buffer and <pjb@informatimago.com>
Re: The Modernization of Emacs: terminology buffer and <pjb@informatimago.com>
Re: The Modernization of Emacs: terminology buffer and <david.golden@oceanfree.net>
Re: The Modernization of Emacs: terminology buffer and <cor@clsnet.nl>
Re: The Modernization of Emacs: terminology buffer and <garrickp@gmail.com>
Re: The Modernization of Emacs: terminology buffer and nebulous99@gmail.com
Re: The Modernization of Emacs: terminology buffer and <cor@clsnet.nl>
Re: why we need perl6 if we have parrort? <tadmc@seesig.invalid>
Re: why we need perl6 if we have parrort? <spamtrap@dot-app.org>
Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 6 Apr 01) (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 23:11:10 +0100
From: David Golden <david.golden@oceanfree.net>
Subject: Re: The Modernization of Emacs: terminology buffer and keybinding
Message-Id: <6OXei.20483$j7.377966@news.indigo.ie>
Twisted wrote:
> Of course not. It's too hard to get started using it, so I gave up on
> it years ago.
So wtf makes you think you're remotely qualified to comment about
emacs as it stands today? Idiot.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2007 00:12:58 +0200
From: Pascal Bourguignon <pjb@informatimago.com>
Subject: Re: The Modernization of Emacs: terminology buffer and keybinding
Message-Id: <87wsxviqol.fsf@thalassa.lan.informatimago.com>
Falcolas <garrickp@gmail.com> writes:
> On Jun 22, 3:06 pm, Pascal Bourguignon <p...@informatimago.com> wrote:
>> How do you call a Mac user interface that let a user work during 3
>> hours to do a simple modification to a MS-Word file that takes 15
>> seconds to do with emacs or a simple unix script?
>
> Would you mind elaborating on *what* took 3 hours to do, as opposed to
> just throwing around unquantified numbers? Would you also mind
> explaining the user's familiarity with the tools they were using on
> the mac?
Anything that the user have to do repeatitively with the GUI, like
copy-and-paste, or reformating of a lot of paragraphs or table
entries, and which is done automatically by writting a one-liner
program in emacs or shell.
And they tried to put graphical user interfaces on scripting, it
doesn't work either. Programming is working with text, with verbs.
> It's just as easy for me to say that it took me 30 minutes to simply
> exit emacs, and use that to justify that emacs, and by extension
> Linux, is a terrible tool.
--
__Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
NOTE: The most fundamental particles in this product are held
together by a "gluing" force about which little is currently known
and whose adhesive power can therefore not be permanently
guaranteed.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2007 00:15:50 +0200
From: Pascal Bourguignon <pjb@informatimago.com>
Subject: Re: The Modernization of Emacs: terminology buffer and keybinding
Message-Id: <87sl8jiqjt.fsf@thalassa.lan.informatimago.com>
Twisted <twisted0n3@gmail.com> writes:
> The Windows world may have a fair bit to learn from the Unix world
> about software reliability and QA, and also about better supporting
> task automation. But not about user interface design for when tasks
> are done manually.
That's the point. Manual tasks have nothing to do in computers.
Computers are there to automatize tasks, not to give you more manual work.
--
__Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
NOTE: The most fundamental particles in this product are held
together by a "gluing" force about which little is currently known
and whose adhesive power can therefore not be permanently
guaranteed.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 23:29:44 +0100
From: David Golden <david.golden@oceanfree.net>
Subject: Re: The Modernization of Emacs: terminology buffer and keybinding
Message-Id: <x3Yei.20484$j7.377529@news.indigo.ie>
Twisted wrote:
> You end up having to memorize the help, because *you can't
> have arbitrary parts of the help and your document open side by side
> and be working on the document*.
WTF? Of course you can. http://oldr.net/emacs_two_frames.png
> I don't know why people keep harping about what version.
Perhaps because essentially none of the crap you're spouting corresponds
to remotely recent versions of emacs they're are aware of. I'd be
increasingly dubious much applies to any previous versions either.
If everyone had such bizarre problems you describe yourself as having
with emacs, well, nobody would be using it. That is clearly not the
case. Of course, no one's pointing a gun at you and making you use it,
either - if you like notepad or joe or whatever, just use them instead.
------------------------------
Date: 22 Jun 2007 22:32:55 +0000
From: Cor Gest <cor@clsnet.nl>
Subject: Re: The Modernization of Emacs: terminology buffer and keybinding
Message-Id: <87bqf7fwmg.fsf@telesippa.clsnet.nl>
Some entity, AKA Twisted <twisted0n3@gmail.com>,
wrote this mindboggling stuff:
(selectively-snipped-or-not-p)
> On Jun 21, 12:03 pm, Robert Uhl <eadmun...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > Twisted <twisted...@gmail.com> writes:
> >
> > >> Emacs is amazingly beginner-friendly for the power and flexibility it
> > >> provides. [snip]
> >
> > > That's a joke, right? I tried it a time or two. Every time it was
> > > rapidly apparent that doing anything non-trivial would require
> > > consulting a cheat sheet. The printed-out kind, since navigating to
> > > the help and back without already having the help displayed and open
> > > to the command reference was also non-trivial.
> >
> > C-h i, C-x b RET is non-trivial?!?
>
> Let's change that so that you see it the way most human beings see it:
>
> > > navigating to
> > > the help and back without already having the help displayed and open
> > > to the command reference was also non-trivial.
>
> > Erh h, dhsd f hHE is non-trivial?
>
> I'm sorry. I don't speak Chinese.
>
> I trust I've made my point. Not only does it insist you learn a whole
> other language (though I'm guessing it's not actually Chinese --
> Greek, maybe), even when you know that's a bunch of keystrokes and
> even what they are...
>
> HOW IN THE BLOODY HELL IS IT SUPPOSED TO OCCUR TO SOMEONE TO ENTER
> THEM, GIVEN THAT THEY HAVE TO DO SO TO REACH THE HELP THAT WOULD TELL
> THEM THOSE ARE THE KEYS TO REACH THE HELP?!
What's your problem ?
Ofcourse a mere program-consumer would not look what was being
installed on his/her system in the first place ...
So after some trivial perusing what was installed and where :
WOW Look, MA ! .... it's all there!
lpr /usr/local/share/emacs/21.3/etc/refcard.ps
or your install-dir........^ ^
or your version.............................^
But then again buying the GNU-book from 'O Reilly would have solved it
in the utmost nicest possible of ways anyway.
Buying or printing the GNU-Emacs Reference Manual should do
quit a memorable job also.
But then again there allways will be people that cannot find their way to
the outhouse even when it stinks a mile a minute.
Cor
--
(defvar MyComputer '((OS . "GNU/Emacs") (IPL . "GNU/Linux")))
The biggest problem LISP has, is that it does not appeal to dumb people
If that fails to satisfy read the HyperSpec, woman frig or Tuxoharata
mailpolicy @ http://www.clsnet.nl/mail.php
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 15:42:52 -0700
From: Falcolas <garrickp@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: The Modernization of Emacs: terminology buffer and keybinding
Message-Id: <1182552172.406571.116390@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>
On Jun 22, 4:12 pm, Pascal Bourguignon <p...@informatimago.com> wrote:
> Anything that the user have to do repeatitively with the GUI, like
> copy-and-paste, or reformating of a lot of paragraphs or table
> entries, and which is done automatically by writting a one-liner
> program in emacs or shell.
So the tool they were using did not support macros? You're right, that
would suck. I'm guessing this is before you could expose the Unix
underpinnings on the mac.
I will agree that I do miss much of the standard shell utility when
working in windows. Fortunately, I am able to replace a lot of that
with well written python or perl scripts.
> And they tried to put graphical user interfaces on scripting, it
> doesn't work either. Programming is working with text, with verbs.
Recording macros could be considered a form of programming, which can
have nothing to do with any text. Granted, they're pretty dumb if you
don't manually modify them, but really, nothing is stopping you from
modifying them either. I can't count the number of times I've created
a macro to do repeated modification of a text file.
I guess ultimately I'm trying to argue the point that just because a
tool was written with a GUI or on Windows does not automatically make
it any less a productive tool than a text based terminal tool. Even in
windows, you can use the keyboard to do all of your work, if you learn
how (thanks to the magic of the alt key).
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 23:08:02 -0000
From: nebulous99@gmail.com
Subject: Re: The Modernization of Emacs: terminology buffer and keybinding
Message-Id: <1182553682.197778.138500@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>
On Jun 22, 6:32 pm, Cor Gest <c...@clsnet.nl> wrote:
> > HOW IN THE BLOODY HELL IS IT SUPPOSED TO OCCUR TO SOMEONE TO ENTER
> > THEM, GIVEN THAT THEY HAVE TO DO SO TO REACH THE HELP THAT WOULD TELL
> > THEM THOSE ARE THE KEYS TO REACH THE HELP?!
>
> What's your problem ?
>
> Ofcourse a mere program-consumer would not look what was being
> installed on his/her system in the first place ...
> So after some trivial perusing what was installed and where :
> WOW Look, MA ! .... it's all there!
>
> lpr /usr/local/share/emacs/21.3/etc/refcard.ps
> or your install-dir........^ ^
> or your version.............................^
So now we're expected to go on a filesystem fishing expedition instead
of just hit F1? One small step (backwards) for a man; one giant leap
(backwards) for mankind. :P
> But then again buying the GNU-book from 'O Reilly would have solved it
> in the utmost nicest possible of ways anyway.
So much for the "free" in "free software". If you can't actually use
it without paying money, whether for the software or for some book, it
isn't really free, is it? The book assumes the role of a copy
protection dongle*. Of course, if the book is under the usual sort of
copyright and not copyleft, so much for the "free as in speech" too,
and nevermind the "free as in beer".
* In fact, I not-too-fondly remember the days when a common copy
protection scheme was for software to periodically (or at least on
startup) insist that the user enter the first word on page N of the
manual, for various changing choices of N. Making the interface simply
unnavigable without the manual strikes me as nearly as effective. If
someone did decide to intentionally cripple the interface of some
"free" software and make a killing off a book de-facto required to use
it, it would be quite the racket. I hope the open source movement
would chew them to pieces and curse them in public though.
------------------------------
Date: 22 Jun 2007 23:53:21 +0000
From: Cor Gest <cor@clsnet.nl>
Subject: Re: The Modernization of Emacs: terminology buffer and keybinding
Message-Id: <877ipvfswe.fsf@telesippa.clsnet.nl>
Some entity, AKA nebulous99@gmail.com,
wrote this mindboggling stuff:
(selectively-snipped-or-not-p)
> On Jun 22, 6:32 pm, Cor Gest <c...@clsnet.nl> wrote:
> > > HOW IN THE BLOODY HELL IS IT SUPPOSED TO OCCUR TO SOMEONE TO ENTER
> > > THEM, GIVEN THAT THEY HAVE TO DO SO TO REACH THE HELP THAT WOULD TELL
> > > THEM THOSE ARE THE KEYS TO REACH THE HELP?!
> >
> > What's your problem ?
> >
> > Ofcourse a mere program-consumer would not look what was being
> > installed on his/her system in the first place ...
> > So after some trivial perusing what was installed and where :
> > WOW Look, MA ! .... it's all there!
> >
> > lpr /usr/local/share/emacs/21.3/etc/refcard.ps
> > or your install-dir........^ ^
> > or your version.............................^
>
> So now we're expected to go on a filesystem fishing expedition instead
> of just hit F1? One small step (backwards) for a man; one giant leap
> (backwards) for mankind. :P
that's M-` Escape-Backtick in a CLI, for you, thank you very much ...
Function-Keys do not work in in a vt100 terminal.
You really are that shallow, aren't you ? and lazy too, huh ?
> copyright and not copyleft, so much for the "free as in speech" too,
> and nevermind the "free as in beer".
Download & print the junk then.
Ofcourse you pay your ISP for the priviledge & give some treehuggers a
nervous brakedown in the process.
Cor
--
(defvar MyComputer '((OS . "GNU/Emacs") (IPL . "GNU/Linux")))
The biggest problem LISP has, is that it does not appeal to dumb people
If that fails to satisfy read the HyperSpec, woman frig or Tuxoharata
mailpolicy @ http://www.clsnet.nl/mail.php
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2007 00:30:22 GMT
From: Tad McClellan <tadmc@seesig.invalid>
Subject: Re: why we need perl6 if we have parrort?
Message-Id: <slrnf7oq8n.469.tadmc@tadmc30.sbcglobal.net>
Sherm Pendley <spamtrap@dot-app.org> wrote:
> Michele Dondi <bik.mido@tiscalinet.it> writes:
>
>> On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 23:32:22 +0800, "sonet" <sonet.all@msa.hinet.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>1.Why we need perl6 ? We can learn how to coding in PIR direct.
>>
>> Why we need C? We can learn how to coding in assembler direct.
>
> Why do we need assembler? We can learn how to coding by flipping toggle
> switches on an operator console.
Why do we need switches? We can learn how to coding by whistling
into a modem.
--
Tad McClellan
email: perl -le "print scalar reverse qq/moc.noitatibaher\100cmdat/"
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 20:40:28 -0400
From: Sherm Pendley <spamtrap@dot-app.org>
Subject: Re: why we need perl6 if we have parrort?
Message-Id: <m2645fy03n.fsf@dot-app.org>
Uri Guttman <uri@stemsystems.com> writes:
>>>>>> "SP" == Sherm Pendley <spamtrap@dot-app.org> writes:
>
> SP> "Clenna Lumina" <savagebeaste@yahoo.com> writes:
> >> Why did they go with parrot instead of just augmenting the existing Perl
> >> interpreter.
>
> SP> Because the existing code base is huge and brittle - as a result
> SP> of twenty- odd years since Perl 1 of "just augmenting" it. There
> SP> was a very real need to do a major ground-up rewrite.
>
> actually perl5 was a complete rewrite by larry and didn't share any
> source code with perl4.
Sorry, my bad - I was under the impression for some reason that quite a lot
of code was carried over. Make that fifteen-odd years then. That's still
quite a bit of cruft anyway. :-)
sherm--
------------------------------
Date: 6 Apr 2001 21:33:47 GMT (Last modified)
From: Perl-Users-Request@ruby.oce.orst.edu (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
Subject: Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 6 Apr 01)
Message-Id: <null>
Administrivia:
#The Perl-Users Digest is a retransmission of the USENET newsgroup
#comp.lang.perl.misc. For subscription or unsubscription requests, send
#the single line:
#
# subscribe perl-users
#or:
# unsubscribe perl-users
#
#to almanac@ruby.oce.orst.edu.
NOTE: due to the current flood of worm email banging on ruby, the smtp
server on ruby has been shut off until further notice.
To submit articles to comp.lang.perl.announce, send your article to
clpa@perl.com.
#To request back copies (available for a week or so), send your request
#to almanac@ruby.oce.orst.edu with the command "send perl-users x.y",
#where x is the volume number and y is the issue number.
#For other requests pertaining to the digest, send mail to
#perl-users-request@ruby.oce.orst.edu. Do not waste your time or mine
#sending perl questions to the -request address, I don't have time to
#answer them even if I did know the answer.
------------------------------
End of Perl-Users Digest V11 Issue 559
**************************************
