From:	ao950 AT FreeNet DOT Carleton DOT CA (Paul Derbyshire)
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: Which is better... EMACS or RHIDE? [Shameless RHIDE plug]
Date:	5 Aug 1997 06:21:39 GMT
Organization:	The National Capital FreeNet
Lines:	15
Message-ID:	<5s6gpj$ovv@freenet-news.carleton.ca>
References:	<33DD805E DOT DF5783BC AT ix DOT netcom DOT com> <33DE1B61 DOT D8DABC92 AT a DOT crl DOT com> <5rscun$bkg AT freenet-news DOT carleton DOT ca> <33E58719 DOT 6F13 AT post DOT comstar DOT ru>
Reply-To:	ao950 AT FreeNet DOT Carleton DOT CA (Paul Derbyshire)
NNTP-Posting-Host:	freenet2.carleton.ca
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

Dim Zegebart (zager AT post DOT comstar DOT ru) writes:
> Paul Derbyshire wrote:
>> 
>> NT. Emacs is allergic to Windows NT. NT must have stricter stuff to
>> protect itself from memory hogs and viruses!)
> You are not quite correct. I have port of Emacs to NT. It comes with
> GIS system Small World and used by it like a shell.

OK, to be exact: GNU Emacs chokes on NT platforms.
--
    .*.  Where feelings are concerned, answers are rarely simple [GeneDeWeese]
 -()  <  When I go to the theater, I always go straight to the "bag and mix"
    `*'  bulk candy section...because variety is the spice of life... [me]
Paul Derbyshire ao950 AT freenet DOT carleton DOT ca, http://chat.carleton.ca/~pderbysh

- Raw text -