Re: [MLUG] web development tools

[Michael <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

> Emacs can take about 1-2 seconds to start on a slow machine with a big 
> configuration file, but it doesn't take longer on a modern computer.  
> You can run it with macros for HTML editing that definitely speed 
> things up. I cannot believe that emacs is slower than nano once it is 
> running.  Do you have a way of demonstrating that?  Slower at what?
The load time is all that matters to me. A lot of my edits take only a 
couple seconds to make so any noticeable load time does make a 
difference. Not as much as it used to on slower computers of course. ;)
> It isn't the length of the code that matters.  If there are certain 
> kinds of tags that you add often, you can use a macro to speed that 
> up.  It definitely helps.
I use all tags equally. Usually the only repetitive function I use is 
cut and paste. The only real feature I can think of that I'd find useful 
is a really easy CnP function that let you use multiple cuttings. My 
problem is that it'd need to work across multiple OSs.
> Does nano do interactive regular expression search and replace?  Emacs 
> does that.  That would be one example of a feature that I find useful.
My code is short and clean so replacements are usually not very 
difficult. I use the 'rpl' command-line tool for this. Anything complex, 
which is rare, I'd use Perl to do probably. Why learn additional tools 
that do the same thing?
> Of course, text editing is done on all sorts of files, not just for 
> web applications.  Emacs is a very powerful editor for many kinds of 
> uses. All I am saying is that it is good to learn emacs.
Agreed. Might as well learn all the common tools. I just don't find 
emacs, or any heavy text/code editor, appropriate for most coding if 
your code is done right to begin with.
> When I teach students to use UNIX/Linux, I start them with Nano 
> because it is so easy to use.  I tell them that emacs exists and that 
> they should plan to learn to use it if they are going to continue 
> working in a UNIX/Linux environment.
You should probably teach vi also as it's needed for anyone that plans 
to be a serious Unix/Linux person. I find nano a nice in-between in the 
vi versus emacs flame war. IMO vi is to lightweight and emacs to 
bloated. It really depends what you're doing but I do find that Unix 
already does damn near everything emacs does so I don't see a point in 
using emacs to do what I've already learned to do just as well in Unix.

_______________________________________________
members mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/members