Re: [open-cobol-list] XEmacs vs Emacs - with OpenCOBOL

[John Culleton]

On Thursday 19 February 2009 07:46:25 am Ulf Dambacher 
wrote:
> Hi Bill
>
> Be careful, you're scratching for some religious war here
> ...
>
> Bill Klein schrieb:
> > On the other hand, XEmacs seems to give me a
> > "reasonable" editor. Therefore, I have been working to
> > get "cobol-mode" to work.
>
> What is your problem for this on windows?
> I darkly rermember to have installed emacs and I was
> searching for the configuration file to insert a line
> like this:
> (load-file "/home/ulf/.emacs.d/cobol-mode.el")
> but I couldn't figure out where.
> And I recall that I ended up putting this line into
> site-lisp/something.
>
> > When I started this, I didn't know that there is a
> > "serious difference of opinion" between the Emacs and
> > XEmacs environments. (If not open war, then at least
> > silent hostilities between their developers).
>
> sadly, yes
>
> > So now that I am part way thru getting XEmacs to work
> > in a COBOL-sensitive way, my question is:
> >
> > Do existing OpenCOBOL users use:
> >  - Emacs? (at least some of the time, but never XEmacs)
> >  - XEmacs? (at least some of the time, but not Emacs)
> >  - (mostly other editors)
> >  - both?
> >  - some other answer (not included above)?
>
> me uses emacs-22.3, never used xemacs because of said
> differences and the only vim command I know is :q
>
>
> /ulf

A difference of opinion is what makes for horse races. One 
additional Gvim command worth knowing is
:syntax on
which yields pretty good syntax highlighting of traditional 
COBOL layout.
-- 
John Culleton
Able Indexers and Typesetters
http://wexfordpress.com