[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: emacs for everything?
From: |
Alan Mackenzie |
Subject: |
Re: emacs for everything? |
Date: |
Sat, 20 Nov 2004 23:05:41 +0000 |
User-agent: |
tin/1.4.5-20010409 ("One More Nightmare") (UNIX) (Linux/2.0.35 (i686)) |
Jay Belanger <belanger@truman.edu> wrote on Sat, 20 Nov 2004 15:40:19 -0600:
> Pascal Bourguignon <spam@mouse-potato.com> writes:
>> Kai Grossjohann <kai@emptydomain.de> writes:
>>> Currently, I use OpenBox. It's painful, but I can bear it.
>> You should try clumpwm: it's written in Common-Lisp and modifiable on
>> the fly.
> Do you meant StumpWM?
> It's eventually going to be a common lisp successor to ratpoison; not
> as featureful yet, but still pretty cool.
What do you mean? ratpoison doesn't _have_ features. That's what makes
it so useable. ;-)
> Jay
--
Alan Mackenzie (Munich, Germany)
Email: aacm@muuc.dee; to decode, wherever there is a repeated letter
(like "aa"), remove half of them (leaving, say, "a").
- Re: emacs for everything?, (continued)
- Re: emacs for everything?, Joe Corneli, 2004/11/16
- Re: emacs for everything?, Pascal Bourguignon, 2004/11/21
- Message not available
- Re: emacs for everything?, Floyd L. Davidson, 2004/11/20
- Re: emacs for everything?, Kai Grossjohann, 2004/11/22
- Re: emacs for everything?, John Sullivan, 2004/11/22
- Re: emacs for everything?, Maciek Pasternacki, 2004/11/23
- Re: emacs for everything?, Kai Grossjohann, 2004/11/25
- Re: emacs for everything?, Maciek Pasternacki, 2004/11/25
- Re: emacs for everything?, Kai Grossjohann, 2004/11/26
- Re: emacs for everything?, Maciek Pasternacki, 2004/11/27