51–60 of 81 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just to point out, the binding for undo in emacs is C-X u.
Actually, the primary binding is 'C-/', with 'C-x u' and 'C-_' as alaises. The 'C-x u' alias exists because it's easier for new users to remember and the 'C-_' alias exists because that's what some terminals send when you press 'C-/'.
Sometimes programmers need to look at unusual files: binary files, very big files, odd data files. Epsilon was designed without the limits of other editors, so it can handle these kinds of jobs, as well as ordinary files. For example, with Epsilon, lines can be as long as you like. This text editor gets it. Such a contrast to some of the editors we have today where anything over a few megabytes is an edge case not wo…
Sometimes programmers need to look at unusual files: binary files, very big files, odd data files. Epsilon was designed without the limits of other editors, so it can handle these kinds of jobs, as well as ordinary files. For example, with Epsilon, lines can be as long as you like. This text editor gets it. Such a contrast to some of the editors we have today where anything over a few megabytes is an edge case not wo…
I'll stick with Emacs for now. $250 is a bit heavy for those of us with little disposable income. In addition, I fail to see the advantage of this over Emacs: Emacs already has pretty much all of Epsilon's features, and a larger community. Furthermore, I highly doubt that its extensibility features are as extensive. It's kinda cool, though. Sidenote: why do I always see the HN headlines up to a day ahead in the previ…
Epsilon is very fast, like coming up in a second. Emacs takes tens of seconds up to a minute. You start Emacs and hope to never shut it down. With epsilon you can start it on a file quickly and move on.
I need to seriously rethink my Emacs configuration. I thought I had a lot of packages and elisp scripts loaded at startup, but I don't think I ever hit the 5-second mark. Emacs starting up a whole minute? What great packages am I missing?
Sometimes programmers need to look at unusual files: binary files, very big files, odd data files. Epsilon was designed without the limits of other editors, so it can handle these kinds of jobs, as well as ordinary files. For example, with Epsilon, lines can be as long as you like. This text editor gets it. Such a contrast to some of the editors we have today where anything over a few megabytes is an edge case not wo…
Really? I loaded a 1.2GB ISO in the demo and it used… 1.2GB of RAM. (At least it worked though, cough Atom cough .) And more importantly it has no unicode support whatsoever as far as I can tell (any non-ASCII characters I typed showed up as ?).
And what you expect here? Other editors usually take 2x to 3x of file size.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Really? I loaded a 1.2GB ISO in the demo and it used… 1.2GB of RAM. (At least it worked though, cough Atom cough .) And more importantly it has no unicode support whatsoever as far as I can tell (any non-ASCII characters I typed showed up as ?).
> I loaded a 1.2GB ISO in the demo and it used… 1.2GB of RAM. And what you expect here? Other editors usually take 2x to 3x of file size.
The OSX deployment not being a "verified developer" shuts down anyone in an enterprise environment. That's too bad, I wanted to try it at work.
That's interesting, and fairly dystopian — you're not allowed to run any software on your computer that isn't signed by Apple? Can you install, say, VirtualBox?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do you prefer it over regular Emacs? How is it better enough to make up for the much larger collection of extensions for Emacs? The demo for me just felt like a snappier Emacs clone.
Well, the first N specific things that come to mind have already been expressed pretty well by previous comments here (including your own "snappier"). The next 10*N things are already expressed pretty well in the 2009-format-but-still-valid-content marketroid material on lugaru.com. As it happens, I haven't found a need to explore a universe of community extensions because right out of the "box" Epsilon does nearly e…
I was a big fan of Epsilon back in the days when it was an alternative to WordStar and I think I still own an original (paid) copy on floppy disks, but I'm not familiar enough (any more) with its feature set to meaningfully answer the question of what qualifies it above Emacs.
Personally, I'm considering paying $250 just for the nostalgia value. And I love fast editors with an uncluttered surface. The ability to edit arbitrarily long lines and binaries is certainly a plus. But I would appreciate, if you'd reconsider, hearing more arguments to knock me off the fence.
The GNU Emacs website does a better sales job...which is interesting because unlike this product, GNU does not even need to sell anything. When looking through the website I see Windows 95-ish screenshots, pages that say they have not been updated in over five years, and little description of what it does beyond saying it's like EMACS. No clue at all about why I should use this rather than one of the other free-beer…
If you'd bother to read, instead of expecting a virtual salesman to spoonfeed you make-believe thrash, you'd notice that a summary of "what it does" ( http://www.lugaru.com/epsinfo.html ) and the damn manual, where you can find everything it does, not just "a little description" ( http://www.lugaru.com/pdf.html , http://www.lugaru.com/epsilon-manual.html ), are linked right on the frontpage.
I'll stick with Emacs for now. $250 is a bit heavy for those of us with little disposable income. In addition, I fail to see the advantage of this over Emacs: Emacs already has pretty much all of Epsilon's features, and a larger community. Furthermore, I highly doubt that its extensibility features are as extensive. It's kinda cool, though. Sidenote: why do I always see the HN headlines up to a day ahead in the previ…
Epsilon is very fast, like coming up in a second. Emacs takes tens of seconds up to a minute. You start Emacs and hope to never shut it down. With epsilon you can start it on a file quickly and move on.