Document Examiner features? | emacs

Mon, 27 Jul 1998 21:12:06 -0400 (EDT)

On Tue, 28 Jul 1998, Rainer Joswig wrote:
> At 19:14 Uhr -0800 26.07.1998, kr wrote:
> > <some stuff>
> Still window handling feels clumsy in XEmacs.

I'm sure they'd be happy to have better methods, if only someone would
write them.  :)

> It is not that bad, but I like to see my code and it's output at the
> same time. Additionally you can link windows (clicking on an object
> in one window (say, a class grapher) will result in an update
> of a linked window (say, an inspector)), which I have seen
> first in the Apple Dylan IDE.

That's a really cool feature.

> >in addition, the advantage of emacs is that all the source code is freely 
> As a Emacs user I have source. As a Symbolics user I have source, too.
> Makes not much difference in practice. If you need an extension
> you either develop it yourself, ask somebody else or ask
> the people who created it. Makes not much difference to me.

I'm not familiar with the Symbolics source code license.  If you make a
changed Genera image, can you redistribute it to other Genera
licensees?  Not being able to do this with Minix was one of the major
frustrations that spawned Linux.

> >available, and anybody could do further modifications and improvements,
> Even a bunch of "loosers" breaking the thing with "improvements". Sorry.

The XEmacs core team is anything but a bunch of losers, and they're not
likely to allow "improvements" that will break it.  No one can make a
change to your copy of XEmacs unless you let them.

> > if only they have enough need for it, in contrast to docex, which is not only not free, but now that symbolics went down the drain (again),
> Symbolics was up last time I looked - two weeks ago.

The web server, or the company?  I hadn't heard anything from them
since December or so, but my Symbolics number is at least two, and
possibly four or more if you only count people I regularly correspond

> Reality is more complicated than that, IMHO.

Quite true.