[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Failing to see the allure of Emacs

From: Uday S Reddy
Subject: Re: Failing to see the allure of Emacs
Date: Tue, 04 May 2010 15:43:27 -0000
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20090812) wrote:

> Dear friends, no one is immune from criticism, but I've noted with
> amusement how the discussion is wandering astray with misreading and
> misunderstanding.  Did I say "that emacs lacked documentation"?  No. 
> Has "no one suggested that you read the source code"?  Someone did.  Are
> the important manuals all up to date?  Obviously not.  Is the
> documentation complete?  Clearly, no.  Is there lots of useful stuff
> there?  Sure.  Is it readily usable?  For some people, for some purposes.

I think everybody jumped up and started objecting, not because they weren't 
open to criticism, but because what you have been saying is completely contrary 
to our own experience.  I personally think Emacs documentation is one of the 
best there is.  It is clear and concise, well-explained, and quite complete.  
Ok, it takes some effort to read it.  But if you do read it -- linearly as I 
mentioned before -- you are well-rewarded.

By the way, I didn't say that you should read the "source code".  I said that 
people that contribute software often put their documentation at the top of 
their source code files as *comments*, instead of writing separate info 
documentation.  But, when such contributed software is accepted into Gnu Emacs, 
Gnu people often add the documentation in the info.  An example is the 
longlines package, which I started using several years ago.  I was glad to see 
that it got included in the Gnu Emacs release and equally glad to see that it 
got its own section in the info manual.  

Despite your claimed expertise with Emacs, I must say that your comments are 
quite off the mark.


reply via email to

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