On 02/21/2013 03:38 PM, Brett McCoy wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 8:24 PM, Len Ovens <len@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
>
>>> dwm has both idiosyncrasies and a learning curve, but so too do most
>>> "expert" pieces of software. vim and emacs are the canonical examples,
>>
>> I never did get anywhere with those two. Ed and Vi mostly, though I think
>> I have forgotten most of it. I found joe and used it ever after... it's
>> still my main CLI text ed.
>
> I think I frighten people at work because I *still* use emacs for all
> of my editing tasks...
Both vi and emacs are powerful pieces of software. They are *not*
designed to be user friendly to anyone else. (Anymore than Wordstar was
in it's day.)
Being hard to learn doesn't make something an "expert" piece of software
- unless you're talking about a *field* that requires lots of expertise
such as rocket science. Text editing isn't rocket science. A text editor
shouldn't be as hard to learn as rocket science. ;-)
-- David gnome@email-addr-hidden authenticity, honesty, community http://clanjones.org/david/ http://dancing-treefrog.deviantart.com/ _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-userReceived on Fri Feb 22 12:15:02 2013
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Feb 22 2013 - 12:15:02 EET