Mail Archives: djgpp/1999/03/23/20:09:38
At 02:30 PM 3/23/99 +0000, you wrote:
>Ralph Proctor wrote:
>>
>> Do one job with EMACS then complain.
>
>I'm an EMACS user, but I can't help but notice a logical flaw in your
>argument. What you are advocating is that only current or past EMACS
>users are qualified to comment on EMACS regardless of the merits of
>their argument.
Oh I did not mean it as a dictum. I just meant it as a nice SEQUENCE of
events. One could say he does not like something before getting
acquainted with it, sure he could. It just seems useful to get some grasp
of the thing before judging it.
>My stand is, if someone has a gripe about EMACS, we need to analyse the
>content of the gripe and not on whether the originator has used EMACS or
>not.
What is the CONTENT of the gripe worth without some experience?
>I haven't used, for example, the PIE editor at all. That doesn't
>disqualify me from making comments about it, like "PIE is inferior to
>EMACS", which experienced PIE users will dismiss as from someone with no
>PIE experience, or like "PIE lacks the integration with a source control
>system", which even the author of PIE cannot dismiss as incorrect,
>because he knows that the comment is correct.
Here you state some facts you know of about PIE. Under those conditions,
something
can be said about PIE. Okay. But let's suppose that many experienced
programmers
testify that PIE is very good for some purpose (I'm just making this up
now) would not
you want to get some experience with PIE before you contradicted them?
I do see your point. One should be too dictatorial, and I don't want to be.
I just think that working with EMACS is rewarding and the system should be
given a
chance.
- Raw text -