delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
>>>>> "RFK" == RFK Partners, Inc <Larry> writes: RFK> At 11:22 AM 1/18/2001, Daniel Barclay wrote: >> "Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc)" wrote: >> > >> > At 02:15 PM 1/16/2001, Daniel Barclay wrote: >> > >"Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc)" wrote: >> > > > >> > >... >> > > > ... However, >> > > > I can say you'll have better luck with a Cygwin version of Emacs, like >> > > > XEmacs. You'll find Cygwin applications work much better with other >> > > > Cygwin applications, especially in areas of detail like this. >> > > >> > >How different is XEmacs from GNU/NTEmacs? >> > > >> > >(I don't do much (any) Lisp programming, so I guess I'm just asking about >> > >default configuration and about compatibility of add-ons like JDE.) >> > >> > Sorry, I was a little unclear. AFAIK, there is a Cygwin version of XEmacs >> > but there isn't one for NTEmacs. My main point was that signal functionality >> > can be handled by Cygwin (and is) or by the O/S. However, the signal coming >> > from a Win32 app doesn't get the same response out of Cygwin as one coming >> > from a Cygwin app. If you have problems in this area, your best bet is to >> > use Cygwin-enabled versions of apps when available. >> >> I just meant how different is XEmacs from NTEmacs to the user? If I switch >> from NTEmacs (which I'm used to) to XEmacs (which I don't know), how big a >> change is that likely to been (from the Emacs user point of view)? RFK> I, of course, am not qualified to answer that question since I don't use RFK> Emacs at all. Others might be able to help. You may be better off asking RFK> this question on some Emacs list though... I've done the switch a long time ago. NO big deal. Just switch of the toolbar and it feels like Emacs. Ciao Volker -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |