Re: Is Emacs very alive, active and improving?

[Emanuel Berg]

Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> writes:

> I can see and ideally agree with Emanuel -- use only
> the tool you are good at.  However I find I live in a
> world that does not always and exactly agree with me
> and Ive to muddle on somehow or other.

Point. Let me tell you, when I did my degree work they
had me do *Microsoft Access 2003*! I haven't had such a
negative computer experience since I played
"Phantasmagoria" while under the influence.

But, when I wrote my report about it, I wrote how much
MS Access sucked and I even included a screenshot of
Emacs as a counterpunch. I don't know if the supervisor
felt guilty, but he didn't ask me to remove that whole
chapter, which was what I expected.

Begins - page 27, Emacs dump - page 31. (If you have
read my posts here you have more or less read the
article already.) That's Emacs in X, in a tabbed urxvt,
by the way, which isn't standard but has to be setup - a
Perl module, and then tweak looks in .Xresources, and
shortcuts... - I remember all those details, but hardly
what was the point of the entire degree project.

http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573/about/degree/x.pdf

-- 
Emanuel Berg, programmer-for-rent. CV, projects, etc at uXu
underground experts united:  http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573