What is the best C IDE on Linux?
Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.
Bob Drzyzgula bob at drzyzgula.orgSat May 12 21:17:01 PDT 2001
- Previous message: What is the best C IDE on Linux?
- Next message: Trivial C question: iterating through chars
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 05:24:24PM -0400, Greg Lindahl wrote: > On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 02:48:51AM -0400, kragen at pobox.com wrote: > > > Right, but it puts it in a new buffer in a new window. So vi's > > ! } f m t RET, seven keypresses, becomes C-@ M-} M-| f m t RET C-x C-x > > C-w C-x o C-@ M-< C-w C-x o C-y C-x 1, twenty-seven keypresses, > > You owe me a beer: you can make a macro to do that in many fewer > keypresses. Hmmm. Emacs is more powerful than I thought. It takes fewer keystrokes to make a macro to do a command than it does to do the command? :-) Seriously, by this logic, gcc is far more powerful even than emacs. Thus, I'm going to add a new rule to your game. Anytime someone claims that the programmability of one editor to do something is equivalent to the native ability of another editor to do the same thing, they'll also be charged a beer. You owe me a beer. Actually, I guess, since I owed you one, we can call it even. > Now can we stop this off-topic thread? Sure. This seems as good a time as any... --Bob
- Previous message: What is the best C IDE on Linux?
- Next message: Trivial C question: iterating through chars
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
