DOS ain't dead - GNU Emacs for DJGPP (22.3 or 23.0.92)

GNU Emacs for DJGPP (22.3 or 23.0.92) (Developers)

posted by Dennis, 04.04.2009, 18:38

> > > But GNU Emacs does lots more, maybe
> > > too much [gomoku, tetris, doctor].) :-D
> >
> > Yes. If it just had a decent editor, it would make a great OS!
>
> The Changelog files alone (not to mention everything else) are bigger than
> most text editors. :lol2:

Eighty Megabytes And Constantly Swapping :-)

Gnu Emacs contributor Eric S. Raymond was going on a while back about what Emacs got wrong, and comparing the virtues of Lisp and Python. I suggested he rewrite Emacs to use Python as the underlying language instead of Lisp, and the response was "Don't tempt me!"

Emacs using Lisp made sense at the time. Lisp was designed for string processing, which is essentially what an editor does, and the versions of Lisp on a couple of early Emacs targets were much better suited for the task than writing Emacs in something else would have been.

Eric also mentioned liking Lua. There's an interesting open source editor called TextAdept which is a small kernel in C and a lot of Lua code. The author calls it "infinitely extensible". I'll have to drop Eric a note to see if he knows of it. He might just decide to make it look like Emacs... :-P

But meanwhile, I wouldn't try to use Gnu Emacs under DOS. It's just way more than I would ever require. I used to use Daniel Lawrence's MicroEMACS under DOS a good deal, and wrote or rewrote an assorment of macros for it. It built "out of the box" on my AT&T 3B1 under SysV R2, and it was nice to have the same editor on multiple platforms.
______
Dennis

Post reply

Complete thread:

GNU Emacs for DJGPP (22.3 or 23.0.92) - Rugxulo, 01.04.2009, 20:46 (Developers)
- GNU Emacs for DJGPP (22.3 or 23.0.92) - marcov, 01.04.2009, 23:28
  - GNU Emacs for DJGPP (22.3 or 23.0.92) - Rugxulo, 02.04.2009, 00:20
    - GNU Emacs for DJGPP (22.3 or 23.0.92) - Dennis, 04.04.2009, 18:38
      - GNU Emacs for DJGPP (22.3 or 23.0.92) - Rugxulo, 04.04.2009, 20:10
        GNU Emacs for DJGPP (22.3 or 23.0.92) - Dennis, 04.04.2009, 22:23
        GNU Emacs for DJGPP (22.3 or 23.0.92) - Rugxulo, 05.04.2009, 23:47
        GNU Emacs for DJGPP (22.3 or 23.0.92) - Dennis, 06.04.2009, 01:25
        65536 byte text files - ecm, 06.04.2009, 19:23
        65536 byte text files - Rugxulo, 07.04.2009, 00:01
        65536 byte text files - ecm, 07.04.2009, 00:14
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - Rugxulo, 07.04.2009, 00:27
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - marcov, 07.04.2009, 13:20
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - Rugxulo, 07.04.2009, 13:35
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - marcov, 08.04.2009, 10:33
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - Rugxulo, 08.04.2009, 19:24
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - RayeR, 08.04.2009, 21:09
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - rr, 08.04.2009, 21:16
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - EZGCC for v2 - Rugxulo, 09.04.2009, 01:11
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - EZGCC for v2 - RayeR, 09.04.2009, 23:15
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - EZGCC for v2 - Rugxulo, 10.04.2009, 05:02
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - EZGCC for v2 - RayeR, 10.04.2009, 14:05
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - marcov, 08.04.2009, 21:44
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - Rugxulo, 09.04.2009, 00:55
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - marcov, 09.04.2009, 09:09
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - Rugxulo, 09.04.2009, 14:14
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - marcov, 09.04.2009, 21:17
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - Rugxulo, 09.04.2009, 21:38
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - marcov, 10.04.2009, 10:16
        EZ-GCC v2 for 386 (1.2 MB 5.25" FD) - Rugxulo, 16.04.2009, 18:38
        EZ-GCC v2 for 386, GNU Emacs 23.0.95 pretest - Rugxulo, 05.07.2009, 21:22
        GNU Emacs 23.0.96 pretest (last one!) - Rugxulo, 16.07.2009, 06:07
        GNU Emacs 23.1 - Rugxulo, 11.09.2009, 06:54
        GNU Emacs for DJGPP (22.3 or 23.0.92) - Rugxulo, 07.04.2009, 00:00
- GNU Emacs 23.0.92 pretest (DJGPP) - Rugxulo, 04.04.2009, 20:38
- GNU Emacs for DJGPP (23.0.92 "pretest") - Rugxulo, 09.04.2009, 21:40