[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: basic question: going back to dired

From: Nikolaj Schumacher
Subject: Re: basic question: going back to dired
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 15:05:02 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1 (gnu/linux)

My attempted witty answer is somewhat diminished by an accidental
premature sending. :)

Xah <address@hidden> wrote:

> I don't think its a good idea to teach or insist that people adopt
> emacs's terminologies.

I don't think its a good idea to teach or insist that people learn
French before going to Paris.  French is a language that has been
adopted by France in the 1530s when there really weren't any other other
languages around, except big mainframe languages like Latin.  In the
20th century English developed as a lingua franca, yet the French failed
to modernize.  They use technical terms that don't make sense to the
non-linguist, like ^Ile de France.  It can't even be spelled by a
modern-language system.

So, whenever friends of mine visit Paris, give them my favorite English
phrases book, so they'll get by.  Teaching them words like "oui" would
only encourage the French...

Now seriously, Xah.  You've posted that link to your website a lot
recently.  And usually I don't mind, because it was at least somewhat
relevant.  But there is a place for discussing enhancements to Emacs.
Beginner's questions aren't it.  They don't even have an interest in
modernizing Emacs, because they could just as well start using a
"modern" editor in the first place.  And those of us who used Emacs
long enough are apparently not bothered too much by the terminology to
change it.  There's no need to bring it up again and again.

Nikolaj Schumacher

reply via email to

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