From:	mschulter AT DOT value DOT net (M. Schulter)
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: Emacs or RHide
Date:	14 May 1997 20:08:57 GMT
Organization:	Value Net Internetwork Services Inc.
Lines:	27
Message-ID:	<5ld64q$35p$1@vnetnews.value.net>
References:	<Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 970511120706 DOT 27751J-100000 AT is> <337617E2 DOT 4450 AT voyageur DOT ca> <3377583e DOT 18169086 AT news DOT cis DOT yale DOT edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	value.net
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

Please let me very briefly express another viewpoint on the matter of
DJGPP and Emacs, without at all taking away from the achievement of RHIDE
and its benefit to many users.

When I first came to DJGPP last July, I had no experience with C and a
very small amount with UNIX (on my Internet provider's system <grin>), yet
I found README.1ST and the DJGPP FAQ quite sufficient for understanding
how to compile simple programs with GCC. 

When I got GNU Emacs 19.31 for DOS compiled that August (this was before
DJGPP included a binary version), I found the tutorial very
"user-friendly," and rapidly started using it with GCC for compiling as
well as PostScript programming. Thus I would say that Emacs brings the
"best of UNIX" to just about any OS or environment.

Of course, Emacs may have been easier for me to use because of my
_inexperience_: I wasn't used to a DOS-based IDE like Borland's, and was
quite happy starting out with a UNIX-compatible approach. The advantage of
having both RHIDE and Emacs available as options in DJGPP is that people
can choose whichever solution they prefer.

Most respectfully,

Margo Schulter
mschulter AT value DOT net

(To respond, please remove the extra . in my default address)

- Raw text -