[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Emacs as a C Programming IDE Configuration?

From: David Combs
Subject: Re: Emacs as a C Programming IDE Configuration?
Date: Sat, 21 May 2011 23:27:58 +0000 (UTC)

In article <address@hidden>,
Ted Zlatanov  <address@hidden> wrote:
>On Mon, 09 May 2011 03:42:00 +0200 "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <address@hidden> 
>PJB> address@hidden (David Combs) writes:
>>> In article <address@hidden>,  <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>> Jorgen Grahn <address@hidden> writes:
>>> ...
>>>> More important, a true emacs user has little need for a shell.
>>> You gotta be kidding -- no use for M-x shell????
>PJB> Almost none.  You can always use M-! <command> RET

       (FYI: Myself, I do M-x shell, then an immediate tcsh.)

But with *shell* you at least get to *keep* (up-screen) a record
of what's happened, what results you got from giving your shell

Pretty nice to be able to whip (way) up-screen to find prior commands,
copy them down to "now", make changes to them, and try again.

For me, beats the heck out of getting a single-cmd-and-result
*Shell Command Output*, then if I want to keep it around, having
to rename-buffer it.

Having all the commands, with their results, in one place
allows easy M-x occur, or just plain "history".

>Let's not forget eshell, the Adventure shell, and zsh.

I tried eshell once, never quite got what the advantages

Adventure shell: never heard of it -- from a bit of
googling it seems that you do shell commands as part
of playing a GAME?  When I'm trying to get something *done*?
Can someone please elaborate a bit?  Thanks.

>Oh, and some consider Tcl/Tk's `wish' a "simple windowing shell" ;)

So what's wrong with tcsh, with tons of aliases?  Seems pretty
optimum to me!  (But am very willing to be educated on alternatives,
as long as I can understand the true advantages.)



reply via email to

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