4 ms·
The difference is the reward one gets after passing the roadblock. Without reading people can't do anything, without emacs most developers manage to work happil
by chr1 10y ago
The difference is the reward one gets after passing the roadblock. Without reading people can't do anything, without emacs most developers manage to work happily.
I do agree that emacs is great, but many aspects of its behavior are dictated by limitations of old machines and can be improved.
- zeveb 10y ago> Without reading people can't do anything, without emacs most developers manage to work happily. Illiterate children are quite happy, too — they have no idea of the worlds which open up before them when they can read. They literally don't know what they are missing. So too for people not using a powerful editor.
- dragonwriter 10y ago> Without reading people can't do anything People could do lots of things before written language was developed, so I'm pretty sure that's far from the truth.
- chr1 10y agoI hoped the meaning would be clear from context, but i see i should have been more careful in writing the comment. Things that a human (who is living now) misses by not learning to read, far outnumber things a programmer misses by not learning emacs. There are very few jobs someone illiterate can perform. But non emacs user can do almost anything that emacs user does, almost as good. So my argument that benefits from learning reading and learning emacs are not comparable, is not far from the truth.