News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Why GNU Emacs?. Parent comment

Re:Why GNU Emacs? by MarcScott on Sunday February 14, 2016 @05:16PM (#11100245)
Given that all these editors are cross-platform, I don't see how the continued development of Emacs could be starving out innovation in the Unix world.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why GNU Emacs? by pjmlp on Sunday February 14, 2016 @05:53PM (#11100392)
Many on UNIX seem to keep living as if their quad-core with 16GB is actually a better PDP-11, hence starving innovation.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why GNU Emacs? by TeMPOraL on Sunday February 14, 2016 @05:57PM (#11100406)
Well, if those quad-cores and 16GB of RAM would actually be put to good use in the "modern"/"hot" IDE world, we could talk. If anything is starving out innovation, it's sticking to CUA, mouse-driven development and rewriting nano in JavaScript...
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why GNU Emacs? by pjmlp on Monday February 15, 2016 @03:09AM (#11102063)
When those IDEs are able to achieve what was possible in Xerox PARC workstations, as demoed occasionally by Bret Victor, then we can talk about moving forward.

PDP-11 command line experience is not even there.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why GNU Emacs? by __david__ on Monday February 15, 2016 @03:00PM (#11105520)
> PDP-11 command line experience is not even there.

Are you saying the modern unix command line is not as good/better than the "PDP-11 command line experience"?

Also, which PDP-11 command line? RSTS? RT11? Unix? or maybe that awesome front panel where you had to manually input your boot loader in binary every time you started the machine?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why GNU Emacs? by pjmlp on Monday February 15, 2016 @03:05PM (#11105556)
> Are you saying the modern unix command line is not as good/better than the "PDP-11 command line experience"?

No, I am saying that it isn't even close to the Xerox PARC REPL experience from Interlisp-D, Mesa/Cedar and Smalltalk environments.

> Also, which PDP-11 command line? RSTS? RT11? Unix? or maybe that awesome front panel where you had to manually input your boot loader in binary every time you started the machine?

The VT-100 interface some people seem to keep living on.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why GNU Emacs? by praqzis on Monday February 15, 2016 @01:19AM (#11101797)
Why have my IDE or developer tools take up all that? Instead, I like to save it to run a 4-node Kubernetes cluster running 8+ Docker containers to have a self contained distributed application locally during development (hey, it works on the airplane too when totally disconnected from a network).
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why GNU Emacs? by mbrock on Monday February 15, 2016 @02:39AM (#11101981)
8 Docker containers isn't really saying much. I'm running 20 on my cheap VPS right now. They're just processes...
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why GNU Emacs? by pjmlp on Monday February 15, 2016 @02:48AM (#11102003)
To be able to enjoy a computing experience as envisioned by Xerox PARC and Olivetti, not AT&T.
[ Parent | on HN ]