[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: basic question: going back to dired
From: |
Juanma Barranquero |
Subject: |
Re: basic question: going back to dired |
Date: |
Tue, 22 Jul 2008 13:13:23 +0200 |
On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 10:23, Bastien Guerry <bzg@altern.org> wrote:
> Or because the concept of "File" is not as central as the concept of
> "buffer".
But Xah Lee is not arguing against the concept. He is arguing against
the terminology...
> The notion of "buffer" might be emacs specific, but it's not 1980's.
I don't think the notion of "buffer" is Emacs specific; as Xah Lee has
said, in other environments (editors, IDEs, etc.) they exist, it's
just that they exist under a different name ("workspace" being a nice
alternative).
Juanma
- Re: basic question: going back to dired, (continued)
- Message not available
- Re: basic question: going back to dired, Pascal J. Bourguignon, 2008/07/22
- Re: basic question: going back to dired, Alexey Pustyntsev, 2008/07/23
- Message not available
- Re: basic question: going back to dired, Thorsten Bonow, 2008/07/23
- Re: basic question: going back to dired, Alan Mackenzie, 2008/07/24
- Message not available
- Re: basic question: going back to dired, Phil Carmody, 2008/07/24
- Message not available
- Re: basic question: going back to dired, Xah, 2008/07/31
Re: basic question: going back to dired, Xah, 2008/07/22
Re: basic question: going back to dired, Xah, 2008/07/22
Message not available
Re: basic question: going back to dired, Miles Bader, 2008/07/22
Re: basic question: going back to dired, nakkaya, 2008/07/22