Mail Archives: djgpp/1997/08/07/11:54:15

From: mschulter AT DOT value DOT net (M. Schulter)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: Which is better... EMACS or RHIDE?
Date: 4 Aug 1997 20:53:44 GMT
Organization: Value Net Internetwork Services Inc.
Lines: 64
Message-ID: <5s5fgp$9r7$>
References: <33DD805E DOT DF5783BC AT ix DOT netcom DOT com> <Pine DOT D-G DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 970801093757 DOT 16551C-100000 AT dg1>
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

Art S. Kagel (kagel AT bloomberg DOT com) wrote:

: Please let us not start the Emacs -vs- RHIDE -vs- VIM -vs- ...... holy
: war again.  Everyone just tell Perry why the use what they use, make a
: recommendation and leave it at that.
: Art S. Kagel, kagel AT bloomberg DOT com

Hi, there, and thanks for some very wise advice that not only might
prevent some unnecessary and unpleasant use of bandwidth <grin>, but has
helped me frame my own answer.

Personally I use Emacs, but for reasons that might not apply to the
average DJGPP user. To a great extent, I use it to program PostScript
graphics in a text-based 32-bit DOS/DJGPP environment -- and also, now, to
learn and design documents in TeX.

To make the most of another comment, for me Emacs is indeed a sort of
"Windows without Windows" -- it takes lots of disk space, uses quite a bit
of RAM <grin>, but gives an immense amount of power in return for that
disk space and RAM while providing a very Margo-friendly text-based
interface. Being able to code a PostScript illustration or TeX document,
press F7, say, and see a super-WYSIWYG preview image on screen _without
leaving Emacs_ is a real treat, just about the equivalent of multitasking.

While Emacs has a great C/C++ mode, which I use, really most of my passion
is directed to PostScript programming (writing code to draw things), and
also now to TeX. The fact that Emacs has a great TeX mode means a lot to
me, but not necessarily to a DJGPP user who wants to run gdb without
having to suspend Emacs.

Of course, lots of real C/C++ programmers will say that Emacs is
definitely the way to go, but my interests are specialized enough (or at
least untypical enough) that I'm really not in a position to say what most
DJGPP users would prefer, Emacs or RHIDE.

The real moral I might draw is that DJGPP has outdone itself! It was meant
as a C/C++ development suite, and along comes this desktop publisher and
turns Emacs into some clone of Adobe Illustrator (or maybe, with TeX,
something like FrameMaker) <grin>.

All this may also bring out an important difference. RHIDE, as far as I
understand, was designed specifically as a C/C++ IDE for DJGPP, with
integrated debugging capabilities and the like.

Emacs, in comparison, is designed as a more general
editing/programming/general-computing environment, with support for C/C++
as just one among many modes -- also TeX, *roff, and so on. Also, RHIDE
was designed specifically with DOS and the Borland IDE in mind; Emacs
assumes an OS capable of true multiprocessing, and so does run into
DOS-specific limitations.

So maybe it isn't surprising that C/C++ people would be split on the
RHIDE/Emacs question, while I can't resist that Emacs TeX mode and the
general Shell Command and macro features.

BTW, I do also enjoy playing "Towers of Hanoi" and "Eliza" <grin>. Maybe
it's my equivalent of QUAKE.

Most respectfully,
Margo Schulter
mschulter AT value DOT net

- Raw text -

  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019