Re: Emacs, was Re: YAPAS (Yet Another Python Advocacy Story) (fwd)

[Adam Turoff <ziggy@panix.com>]

Nicolai wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Mar 2000, Robert Spier wrote:
> > Sounds like smart programming design.  Make the oft-used stuff really
> > fast, and everything else, normal.  [...]
> 
> Whether or not the design of emacs is a Good Thing (tm) is immaterial to
> this discussion.

Actually, it is.  This whole thread started when you questioned the 
suitability of Python to write a word processor.  

If the model used to write emacs in lisp is valid, then there is no
logical reason why the same model can't be used with Perl, Python, etc.
So, after all is said and done, yes -- Python is a suitable language
for writing a word processor just as lisp is a suitable langauge for
writing emacs.  All of the features and arguments in favor of lisp
with emacs can be applied to Python.

> > NR> Besides, emacs is still not Word. I'd like to see somebody do a
> > NR> word like program in a scripted language (hehe, here's where I
> > NR> invite people to contradict me).
> > 
> > Emacs does a lot more than Word.  If you want to do a point by point
> > comparison, we can.  

I don't think that's necessary, since Word is a straw man in this 
discussion.  Yes, it's a "word processor", and yes, it does have the 
largest market share in it's class, but it's a false goal.  Should any
application claiming to be a word processor meet Word feature-for-feature
or be declared not a word processor because it has not attained parity
with Word?  Most certainly not.

It occurs to me that we're discussing emacs-as-word-processor, but no one
has offered a definition of 'word processor'.  Here's my standard:
	- handles simple text editing
	- handles multiple fonts, including proportional fonts
	- handles styled text
	- handles margins and absolute positioning
	- provides wysiwyg output 

That pretty much describes the original MacWrite from 1984.  Everything
else that Word does is either a bell, a whistle or an interface improvement.

Should emacs, kword or abiword offer a Legal Pleading wizard in order
to be considered a word processor?  No.  Should it be able to embed 
web pages with javascript and applets and offer live updating of those
documents?  No.

Word is *not* the gold standard of word processing.  It is an abomination
that includes the most used word processing environment, as well as a 
whole host of features that have questionable or dubious merit in a 
destkop application.

> Oh, I know it does. Unfortunately Emacs is no Word. I'd like to see a
> computer illiterate sit down and use emacs w/ the relative ease that
> he/she can use Word. 

The reason why emacs can reasonably be disqualified as a word processor are:
	- support for proportional fonts
	- support for styled text
	- grandmotherly simple UI.

I believe all three are being worked on, and they're being worked on 
mostly in lisp.

Again, getting back to the original question, is (Python|Perl|Lisp|etc.)
a suitable environment for writing a "desktop application" like a 
"word processor"?  Yes.  Emacs is proof that a large-scale application
can be implemented using a "scripting language".
 
> Not really. Emacs is more of an operating system than anything else. They
> just need to get the hurd into it & it'll be complete :)

Now you're just playing word games.  

Z.

**Majordomo list services provided by PANIX <URL:http://www.panix.com>**
**To Unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe phl" to majordomo@lists.pm.org**