[John J. Lee] > François Pinard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > [...] > > Overall, Vim is also cleaner than Emacs, and this pleases me. > [...]
> Is this still true when comparing XEmacs vs. vim? (rather than > GNU Emacs vs. vim) I've always used GNU Emacs, but I have got the > impression that XEmacs is (was?) cleaner in some ways. I have much less experience with XEmacs. One friend of mine (Horvje) is quite involved in XEmacs development, and he convinced me to give it a serious and honest try. I did, yet never as deeply as I learned Emacs. My feeling has been that XEmacs, despite cleaner and offering a lot, in the realm of attractive chrome and original features, is slower overall and a bit less stable than GNU Emacs (Richard just _hates_ when one opposes XEmacs to GNU Emacs, and by doing so, involuntarily suggesting that XEmacs might not be "GNU"! But I'm not in GNU politics nowadays! :-). What most discouraged me is that fact that, at the time of my tries, neither Allout nor RMAIL were supported, both of which I was heavily using[1]. And also a few other gooddies as well. I know from users that Pymacs, which allows for Python usage from within Emacs, is supported in XEmacs just as well as in GNU Emacs. -------- [1] Now in Vim, I switched from RMAIL to plain `mbox', and now use Mutt as a mail user agent -- which I find blazingly speedy even on big folders. For Allout, I rewrote an Allout support for Vim, as I could not walk away from it -- alternative solutions were too heavy. -- François Pinard http://pinard.progiciels-bpi.ca -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
