3 ms·

I'm not offended or insulted by what you said. I don't even disagree with most of it, except maybe how you're using the terms "complete" and "proper." Saying th

by sjolsen 12y ago

I'm not offended or insulted by what you said. I don't even disagree with most of it, except maybe how you're using the terms "complete" and "proper." Saying that something isn't complete or proper generally really isn't compatible with a claim of impartiality. I really have no problem with criticism of Emacs (provided that it's true, and now that you've expanded a little, I think what you're saying is true), but if you feel that familiarity (whether everyone's or just someone's) really sets Emacs and Sublime Text apart, call it criticism! :)

kasabali 12y ago
I'm happy I didn't offend anybody, then :). I want to explain the terms again. First of all "not proper" or "incomplete" isn't the adjectives I've used for Emacs itself, but the GUI of Emacs. I did use proper in the sense of common GUI idioms and conventions, and I'm not a native speaker, so if you think that was not a right choice, you're probably right. For the incomplete, again we are not talking if Emacs is complete or not, we are debating if Emacs is a "full gui app" or not, and since I don't think it is using gui facilities to full extent (and instead it just creates a basic gui window, shows some menus and prompt dialogs here and there, and then handles everything with it's own mechanisms like windows and buffers), it's not a "full gui app". Again, if you have a better word of choice for it than the words I chose, I'd be happy to accept them. Sorry it caused trouble more than it worth.