[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Emacs terminology (not again!?) [was: Apologia for bzr]
From: |
David Reitter |
Subject: |
Re: Emacs terminology (not again!?) [was: Apologia for bzr] |
Date: |
Tue, 7 Jan 2014 14:56:50 -0500 |
On Jan 7, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Drew Adams <address@hidden> wrote:
>> Beyond trying to remember, using current terminology is sends
>> the message that Emacs is old, stubborn, and crufty, which is a
>> problem when trying to introduce new users to Emacs.
>
> No, it does not. If Emacs were invented from scratch today, it
> would still need its own jargon. Some of the particulars would
> no doubt be different, but Emacs would still stand apart in both
> behavior and terminology.
Yes, but the jargon would not conflict with widely used terminology. Would you
really redefine a common word like "window", and invent another one referring
to the established meaning of windows?
Other things are actually different, and different terms are appropriate.
"Mark" comes to mind, or "major" and "minor" modes.
You're right in that Emacs is not yet another editor, and you want to send that
message. But, don't people see this soon enough when they actually use it?
The UI experiment that I have been interested in with Aquamacs, is to allow
people to gradually transition from a newbie user to a proficient one with high
routinized sequences of actions. This is actually something that other editors
and IDEs can't provide to the extent that Emacs does. Netbeans, Eclipse, Xcode
- they're great IDEs and very integrated, and certainly useful for proficient
users, but they're nowhere nearly as efficient as Emacs.
- Re: Apologia for bzr, (continued)
- Re: Apologia for bzr, Thien-Thi Nguyen, 2014/01/07
- Re: Apologia for bzr, Christophe Poncy, 2014/01/07
- Re: Apologia for bzr, Richard Stallman, 2014/01/07
- Re: Apologia for bzr, Stefan Monnier, 2014/01/06
- Re: Apologia for bzr, Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen, 2014/01/07
- Emacs terminology (not again!?) [was: Apologia for bzr], Drew Adams, 2014/01/07
- Re: Emacs terminology (not again!?) [was: Apologia for bzr], Lennart Borgman, 2014/01/07
- Re: Emacs terminology (not again!?) [was: Apologia for bzr], Joel Mccracken, 2014/01/07
- RE: Emacs terminology (not again!?) [was: Apologia for bzr], Drew Adams, 2014/01/07
- Re: Emacs terminology (not again!?) [was: Apologia for bzr], Lennart Borgman, 2014/01/07
- Re: Emacs terminology (not again!?) [was: Apologia for bzr],
David Reitter <=
- RE: Emacs terminology (not again!?) [was: Apologia for bzr], Drew Adams, 2014/01/07
- Re: Emacs terminology (not again!?) [was: Apologia for bzr], Lennart Borgman, 2014/01/07
- Re: Emacs terminology (not again!?) [was: Apologia for bzr], David Reitter, 2014/01/09
- Re: Emacs terminology (not again!?) [was: Apologia for bzr], Tom, 2014/01/10
- Re: Emacs terminology (not again!?) [was: Apologia for bzr], David Kastrup, 2014/01/07
- Re: Emacs terminology (not again!?) [was: Apologia for bzr], Lennart Borgman, 2014/01/07
- Great Old One?, Eric S. Raymond, 2014/01/07
- Re: Great Old One?, Bob Bobeck, 2014/01/07
- Re: Great Old One?, Jordi GutiƩrrez Hermoso, 2014/01/08
- Re: Great Old One?, Jay Belanger, 2014/01/07