Re:Glossy vs matte screens: why the PC industry’s out of touch
by SoftwareMaven on Tuesday May 24, 2011 @02:10AM
(#2578870)
Run your shell inside emacs and you get the best of both worlds. I invariably have my third column running two to five terminals.
Re:Glossy vs matte screens: why the PC industry’s out of touch
by ScottBurson on Tuesday May 24, 2011 @12:34AM
(#2578685)
Ah! Another Emacs user who likes to spread 6 windows across a 1920-wide display. I knew I couldn't be the only one :-)
I use XEmacs with the 6x10 font, and can get three windows across, each 100 characters wide, all in the same frame (it takes a little fiddling to set up, but then I keep the session around a long time).
Re:Glossy vs matte screens: why the PC industry’s out of touch
by nunb on Tuesday May 24, 2011 @06:55AM
(#2579373)
I use some revive mode code a friend wrote to revive my frame config.
Just like desktop-save, I do C-x S instead, and it saves all open frames, and the buffers they contain (no frame size or position though, afair).
C-x F to load in the rare event I need to restart emacs.
The code is at https://github.com/nunb/revive-mode-config
(I would generally consider the need to have 6 views of your source to get your job done a code smell, but it isn't always my code, and lately we've been doing some client/message-bus/server code where 6 starts to feel a bit constraining.)
Technically I'm still neutral on the emacs v. vim wars and they're both good editors. But looking around me, the vim users in my office really need to get better about buffer management. I'm sure vim can technically do everything emacs can do with buffers and splitting and windowing, but "nobody" seems to do it.