[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: What I'm missing when using M-x shell

From: Francis Moreau
Subject: Re: What I'm missing when using M-x shell
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2008 18:43:04 +0200

On Sat, Sep 13, 2008 at 5:42 PM, Dan Espen
<address@hidden> wrote:
> "Francis Moreau" <address@hidden> writes:
>> [ please CC me when replying to me ]
>> On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 7:34 PM, Dan Espen
>> <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> Compiles are M-x compile, greps are M-x grep,
>>> ls is dired, email is MH-E.
>> But what would you suggest as replacement for:
>> $ make && gdb || mail -s "Compilation failed" home
> First, the make is always run as M-x compile.
> In my case, the most likely outcome from M-x compile is
> that I'll be correcting syntax errors.  Since I've run
> M-x compile, M-x next-error becomes really useful.
> So, no make from the command line for me.
> I'm got a big fan of running under gdb.
> If I did want to run under gdb a lot, I'd probably figure out
> Emacs gdb.
> Typically my make target is not just a compile but a compile
> and test and check results.  No need to send myself
> an email since the M-x compile clearly shows whether the
> compile/test worked.

That was just a (silly) example where scripting can be powerful and
can't be replace by some M-x <cmd> or whatever...


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]