The new stuff is the "-demon" (?) that lets you start an emacs in the background more easily, and that you can have one emacsclient use terminal mode and a different one use windowed mode.
That was exactly the part that I wrote of being excited about.:-)
But the real question is, can you call 'em up today and order a XP license for the same $65?
Not an MS fan by a long stretch, but still: why would you expect to get a full retail price refund on a bundled item? If that were generally possible, you could make a living by buying composite items and getting refunds for their individual parts, the sum exceeding the original purchase price.
Oh, I use screen all the time to fire off long-running processes at work and check in on them later from home. It's a great program and I use it a lot. However, it's very much an incomplete replacement for Emacs's client-server arrangement. In addition to the mentioned GUI/console handling, it provides different views to the same session. I could have a window open at work displaying the exact spot in my code where I left off, then connect from home to fiddle with my SQL session history.
There is a lot of overlap between the two concepts, but screen supports a (strict?) subset of Emacs's features.
Re:Eight megs and constantly swapping
on
Emacs Hits Version 23
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Hit C-h t to run the tutorial and work through it. If you really have an interest in checking it out, the tutorial will explain the "Emacs way" and clear up a lot of basic questions for you.
How well does that work for graphical programs, like the version of Emacs that was running on my desktop at the time? How well does it work for programs that you didn't have the foresight to launch into a screen session to begin with?
While it wouldn't work for the GUI version of Emacs, the grandparent's joy over the client-server functionality could have been achieved through screen.
If you really believe that, then you've never used Emacs. For starters, it's rare that I'd want the exact same view of my Emacs session in more than one terminal or GUI "frame".
I never thought I'd see the day that a text editor needed a network-aware client-server architecture.
In my case, it was so that I could SSH in, run a Python script to generate an SQL query, then run that query in a PostgreSQL interaction buffer. I'd written a macro to do all that automatically and didn't want to spend more than 3 seconds recreating something that was already working - if I was at the Emacs session running at my office.
Exactly. I've been randomly using clients for about a decade, but it's only been very recently that you could connect a GUI or text client to a server that was launched in the other mode.
What if he tapped his 5 year old neighbor when he was 8? or 13? 18? 38?
Go back and reread that with the expectation that I'm a reasonable, normal person. Seriously, I'm not that interested in pedanticism. It was implicit in the context that the hypothetical molester was 18+.
The summary misses the absolute best new feature: the separation of the client and server. I have a GUI Emacs running on my workstation, always. I sshed in a few days ago, wishing I could access one of its buffers. Voila! emacsclient -nw connected to the underlying server and gave me full access, in console mode, to the running Emacs. Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!
What is with the excessive demonization of sex offenders today? What makes this class of crime the worst by such a large margin that we need a whole separate form of punishment? Why not a murderer registry? Certainly murder is a more serious crime, right?
First, note that I'm not disagreeing with your main point. Still, I'd say the difference is this: there are justifiable homicides, but never any justifiable offenses against children. I'm not condoning murder, but I can imagine circumstances where someone might kill a specific person in retribution or to end long running torture or abuse. The murderer might be an otherwise good person who would never kill again outside that exact situation, and although punishment might be appropriate depending on the facts, they don't pose a danger to society.
Contrast with sexual offenses [1], where a low estimate of recidivism is at about 52%. Such offenders do represent a real, long-term threat to those around them. I'm not sure how to reconcile that with the idea of "paying one's debt to society", because while I believe that serving a prison sentence should wipe the slate clean, there's no way I'd move my family next to someone with "only" a 52% chance of repeating their crime.
[1] I mean real ones, like adults preying on children. 18 year old boys having sex with their 17 year old girlfriends, or peeing on trees, or fooling around in cars doesn't count. I imagine the recidivism rate of those "crimes" approaches 100%.
Agreed 100%, but at least the app does list convictions. I'm not so worried about the neighbor kid who got caught sleeping with his girlfriend as the guy a few blocks over who tapped his 5-year-old neighbor.
We get organic veg delivered to our door from a local farm and it last much longer due to shorter pick to delivery time scales.
I bet a regular farm grown carrot delivered from a local source would taste equally good. Having bought organic (the crunchy feely kind) and regular (the normal kind of "organic") food from the same store, I didn't see much of a difference. The key in both is the time-to-table, and fresher always tastes better than old.
We could easily feed the world if sociopathic dictators didn't use starvation to control their populace.
Fixed that for you. We easily grow enough food to feed everyone in the world. The problem is getting it to people who live in Zimbabwe and North Korea around their genocidal leaders.
So no one can copyright 'a flat surface conducive to writing' but if someone produces a mathematical method to determine if a number is prime (instantly) that deserves a copyright.
I'm sorry, but you're talking out your ass. The whole goal of patents and copyrights is to benefit society by virtue of granting a little incentive for inventors to publish their findings. I'm glad that Leibniz and Newton didn't patent their methods for computing the rate of change of motion, or we'd be having this conversation via quill-pen-on-parchment tied to carrier pigeons.
I'll simplify this since it seems to be above you: you can't patent math, nor should you. Algorithms are math. Combining algorithms yields an algorithm. Ergo, algorithms should be unpatentable, regardless of cleverness or novelty. To say otherwise is to display an astounding ignorance of several hundred years of patent law and societal ramifications.
I'm pretty neutral on it, honestly. I'm not for vigilantism and its inherent societal breakdown, but I'd have a hard time convicting someone like that guy from Texas who's being sued by patent trolls, apparently for no other reason than that he's from Texas, were he to take the law into his own hands.
Maybe Americans should start taking their democratic rights more seriously before blaming "the government" and "the Wall Street executives".
Who says he was joking? There are a lot of people who think patent trolls are actively destroying our economy and that the government can't or won't do anything to protect the population.
I'm sorry that you guys don't like it, but it's OK for people to want to make money off their ideas.
As a capitalist, I wholeheartedly agree. As a citizen, I disagree with the government's grant of exclusive rights on something as nebulous as a software algorithm (as opposed to a specific implementation of that algorithm). Make money off your ideas all you want. I do! Just don't expect to make money of the sole act of having thought them.
Slashdot Mirror
The new stuff is the "-demon" (?) that lets you start an emacs in the background more easily, and that you can have one emacsclient use terminal mode and a different one use windowed mode.
That was exactly the part that I wrote of being excited about. :-)
Try writing notated music on a computer and then get back to me on how hard writing and manipulating text is.
There's an app for that.
But the real question is, can you call 'em up today and order a XP license for the same $65?
Not an MS fan by a long stretch, but still: why would you expect to get a full retail price refund on a bundled item? If that were generally possible, you could make a living by buying composite items and getting refunds for their individual parts, the sum exceeding the original purchase price.
Oh, I use screen all the time to fire off long-running processes at work and check in on them later from home. It's a great program and I use it a lot. However, it's very much an incomplete replacement for Emacs's client-server arrangement. In addition to the mentioned GUI/console handling, it provides different views to the same session. I could have a window open at work displaying the exact spot in my code where I left off, then connect from home to fiddle with my SQL session history.
There is a lot of overlap between the two concepts, but screen supports a (strict?) subset of Emacs's features.
Hit C-h t to run the tutorial and work through it. If you really have an interest in checking it out, the tutorial will explain the "Emacs way" and clear up a lot of basic questions for you.
Horses for courses, I suppose. I can't stand doing Python in anything but Emacs.
How well does that work for graphical programs, like the version of Emacs that was running on my desktop at the time? How well does it work for programs that you didn't have the foresight to launch into a screen session to begin with?
While it wouldn't work for the GUI version of Emacs, the grandparent's joy over the client-server functionality could have been achieved through screen.
If you really believe that, then you've never used Emacs. For starters, it's rare that I'd want the exact same view of my Emacs session in more than one terminal or GUI "frame".
In what way is Emacs not a modern IDE, other that it also works perfectly in console mode?
I remember a great AIM client for it (tnt I think)
Yep. Kids these days can use M-x twit-show-recent-tweets. Nope, I'm not kidding.
My buffer was a connection to a PostgreSQL server and about three days worth of history. How well does that work out for you?
I never thought I'd see the day that a text editor needed a network-aware client-server architecture.
In my case, it was so that I could SSH in, run a Python script to generate an SQL query, then run that query in a PostgreSQL interaction buffer. I'd written a macro to do all that automatically and didn't want to spend more than 3 seconds recreating something that was already working - if I was at the Emacs session running at my office.
Exactly. I've been randomly using clients for about a decade, but it's only been very recently that you could connect a GUI or text client to a server that was launched in the other mode.
What if he tapped his 5 year old neighbor when he was 8? or 13? 18? 38?
Go back and reread that with the expectation that I'm a reasonable, normal person. Seriously, I'm not that interested in pedanticism. It was implicit in the context that the hypothetical molester was 18+.
The summary misses the absolute best new feature: the separation of the client and server. I have a GUI Emacs running on my workstation, always. I sshed in a few days ago, wishing I could access one of its buffers. Voila! emacsclient -nw connected to the underlying server and gave me full access, in console mode, to the running Emacs. Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!
What is with the excessive demonization of sex offenders today? What makes this class of crime the worst by such a large margin that we need a whole separate form of punishment? Why not a murderer registry? Certainly murder is a more serious crime, right?
First, note that I'm not disagreeing with your main point. Still, I'd say the difference is this: there are justifiable homicides, but never any justifiable offenses against children. I'm not condoning murder, but I can imagine circumstances where someone might kill a specific person in retribution or to end long running torture or abuse. The murderer might be an otherwise good person who would never kill again outside that exact situation, and although punishment might be appropriate depending on the facts, they don't pose a danger to society.
Contrast with sexual offenses [1], where a low estimate of recidivism is at about 52%. Such offenders do represent a real, long-term threat to those around them. I'm not sure how to reconcile that with the idea of "paying one's debt to society", because while I believe that serving a prison sentence should wipe the slate clean, there's no way I'd move my family next to someone with "only" a 52% chance of repeating their crime.
[1] I mean real ones, like adults preying on children. 18 year old boys having sex with their 17 year old girlfriends, or peeing on trees, or fooling around in cars doesn't count. I imagine the recidivism rate of those "crimes" approaches 100%.
Agreed 100%, but at least the app does list convictions. I'm not so worried about the neighbor kid who got caught sleeping with his girlfriend as the guy a few blocks over who tapped his 5-year-old neighbor.
We get organic veg delivered to our door from a local farm and it last much longer due to shorter pick to delivery time scales.
I bet a regular farm grown carrot delivered from a local source would taste equally good. Having bought organic (the crunchy feely kind) and regular (the normal kind of "organic") food from the same store, I didn't see much of a difference. The key in both is the time-to-table, and fresher always tastes better than old.
We could easily feed the world if sociopathic dictators didn't use starvation to control their populace.
Fixed that for you. We easily grow enough food to feed everyone in the world. The problem is getting it to people who live in Zimbabwe and North Korea around their genocidal leaders.
You'd think I was drunk when I wrote that. Apparently I'm not supposed to Slashdot after midnight, either.
I know, and it bugs me. Jayson is a genius but somehow managed to recognize the clear superiority of Python.
/ done flamesuit
// Hi, Jayson!
So no one can copyright 'a flat surface conducive to writing' but if someone produces a mathematical method to determine if a number is prime (instantly) that deserves a copyright.
I'm sorry, but you're talking out your ass. The whole goal of patents and copyrights is to benefit society by virtue of granting a little incentive for inventors to publish their findings. I'm glad that Leibniz and Newton didn't patent their methods for computing the rate of change of motion, or we'd be having this conversation via quill-pen-on-parchment tied to carrier pigeons.
I'll simplify this since it seems to be above you: you can't patent math, nor should you. Algorithms are math. Combining algorithms yields an algorithm. Ergo, algorithms should be unpatentable, regardless of cleverness or novelty. To say otherwise is to display an astounding ignorance of several hundred years of patent law and societal ramifications.
I'm pretty neutral on it, honestly. I'm not for vigilantism and its inherent societal breakdown, but I'd have a hard time convicting someone like that guy from Texas who's being sued by patent trolls, apparently for no other reason than that he's from Texas, were he to take the law into his own hands.
Maybe Americans should start taking their democratic rights more seriously before blaming "the government" and "the Wall Street executives".
I'd say that's exactly what he'd be doing.
Who says he was joking? There are a lot of people who think patent trolls are actively destroying our economy and that the government can't or won't do anything to protect the population.
I'm sorry that you guys don't like it, but it's OK for people to want to make money off their ideas.
As a capitalist, I wholeheartedly agree. As a citizen, I disagree with the government's grant of exclusive rights on something as nebulous as a software algorithm (as opposed to a specific implementation of that algorithm). Make money off your ideas all you want. I do! Just don't expect to make money of the sole act of having thought them.