SEO

David Combs wrote:
>
> In article <400B59B4.9CD6FF9A@doe.carleton.ca>,
> Fred Ma <fma@doe.carleton.ca> wrote:
> ...
> >I think the hyperlinking is important. I tried emacs, but
> >having used vi[m] for as long as I can remember, it's a
> >little difficult. Also, I'm getting caught into the trap
> >of spending lots of time getting to know tools, rather than
> >actual algorithm development e.g. just getting to know
> >info, vim's taglist, source-navigator, etc., etc.. So I'm
> >going to shy away from learning another app now (especially
> >since I already spent the time with info), but more than
> >likely, I will do so in the future.
>
> (1) It's hard to imagine time *better* spent than
> spending it learning emacs.
>
> Emacs is something, once learned a bit of (you'll *never* learn
> all of it -- nor will anyone else!), you'll use almost every
> minute you're on the computer.
>
> I can't think of *anything* that'll boost your throughput
> as much as emacs-skill will.
>
> (Obviously, don't take my word for it; perhaps, however,
> a bunch of people will followup either denying or verifying
> it.)
>
> (2) By far the easiest, most painless way to learn the rudiments
> of emacs is by taking it's tutorial. Simply run emacs,
> then type in only these two characters: C-h t (control-h
> followed by a "t").
>
> Then just do what it says. 100% painless!
>
> Have fun
>
> (Oh, sometime while learning (taking the tutorial), type
> in "M-x doctor", and have a conversation with the shrink.
> You'll enjoy this famous (infamous?) A-I-ish program
> from way back in the 70's.)
>
> David


Hi, David,

I did spend some time with it. I think, like any powerful
tool, it just takes lots of time before I can get the
functionality I was looking for. I don't doubt that
emacs can be as wonderful as you described, but for me
to get to that point from my current point will have to
happen when I have more time. I suspect that's why
people have different work flows, because they happen
to be exposed to certain things in building their
personal knowledge. You can't just rip it all down
to replace it with another work flow overnight. One can
incrementally move around and, with time, become familiar
with alternative working flows, but the more established
one will probably always be more productive for any
particular individual. There's alot of time invested into
an making an individual's workflow work well for him/her.

While breadth versus depth is
always a balance, I think many people are in the position
where they have to leverage their established knowledge
for a certain amount of productivity, and expand/explore
alternatives with the remaining time. Even then, there
are many different situation-specific priorities. But
thanks for the glimpse into the level to which emacs can
be leveraged, given sufficient exposure and familiarity.

Fred
--
Fred Ma
Dept. of Electronics, Carleton University
1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, Ontario
Canada, K1S 5B6

In gnu.gcc.help David Combs <dkcombs@panix.com> wrote:
> Emacs is something, once learned a bit of (you'll *never* learn
> all of it -- nor will anyone else!), you'll use almost every
> minute you're on the computer.
> [...]
> (Oh, sometime while learning (taking the tutorial), type
> in "M-x doctor", and have a conversation with the shrink.

That's the explanation I've been looking for for years...

Andre'