Anyone use ELSE minor-mode in Emacs?

[François Pinard]

[John J Lee]

> how do your fingers like vi?  Mine have never been completely happy
> with the standard emacs keys, but I don't like to change them.

Emacs and Vim key-bindings are pretty different, down to the logical
organisation and structure of commands.  One thing which has been
difficult for me is to learn to shift the right hand one position left
on the `HJKL' keys and unshift it on `JKL;' depending on what I want to
do, this detail often slowed me down initially.  I'm not as speedy in
Vim that I was in Emacs. More it goes, easier it gets.  I expect and
accept that it will require a few more months before the spinal chord
adapts. :-)

I think Vim key-bindings are a bit softer on the hand and fingers than
Emacs, because most usual commands use simple lower case letters, others
use upper case letters, and only rarely you have to resort to the
control key.  However, the Escape key is often needed, and a bit remote.
This advantage somewhat vanishes when I type French text, as the `cf'
keyboard uses a mix of dead keys (some shifted).  Other combinations
require a full repositioning of the right hand, Python brackets and
braces in particular.

Another thing I observed is that Vim often invites me into using the
mouse (efficiently), while I traditionally dislike it.  Strange.

> I keep meaning to give the vi keys a chance, but it's almost like
> learning to type again...

Granted! :-)

> I use [Gnus] for news (apart from now, since I got this as email, not
> news).  Does it do good disconnected IMAP, I wonder?

I have about no experiences with IMAP, so I do not know.

> - offline and disconnected-mode support is poor to non-existent (bad if
>   you use a modem)

Here at home, `fetchmail' is automatically called each time a modem
connection is established, and it takes care of transferring all my
email over into the local machine spool.  I use POP3 because I prefer
the format of the logs it creates, but IMAP is available as well and
works.  One or the other does not make much difference.

Then a Python script analyses the received email and pre-sorts it in
many mail-group folders.  That script interprets splitting rule trees
which I adapted to Python out of my original "fancy splitting" setup in
Gnus.  It then repeatedly calls Mutt on each mail-group having received
new mail, allowing me to read it, reply to it, or do more fine splitting
and saving.  At saving time, another Python script tremendously help me
at quickly selecting the proper folder (among more than 4000) for long
term filing, this selection script was also adapted out of a bit complex
setup, originally all written in Emacs Lisp.

I make little use of `procmail' in all this, besides suppression of some
bold, blatant SPAM.  Python is much more versatile, legible, and likely
speedier as well.  I also avoid many locking problems this way.

> With Barry Warsaw's email module being used by Mailman (Barry again,
> of course), I suppose that takes care of *some* of the mess, but far
> from all.

Spambayes also uses some forgiving tricks over Barry's `email', which I
recycled in my own things.  I often use one of my own script to somehow
"repair" mis-formatted folders, or transform Babyl folders.  I had
to touch this script recently, as surprisingly, Mutt does not always
properly guarantee proper line termination when it saves a message.  Of
course, I adjusted the saving procedure when I realised this, but for
everywhere I priorly saved email after having adopted Mutt, reparation
might be needed.

It's quite demanding on message agents to be at the same time competent
and forgiving. :-)

> > it.  In my case at least, the big move is now part of the past, the main
> > suffering is behind.

> You talk like an ex-drug addict ;-)

Editors are addictive.  That's why so many people have quasi-religious
feeling about them.  They feel threatened very deeply whenever they see
criticism.  Salvaging their editor is akin to salvaging themselves. :-)

> python-mode has quirks

Vim file type for Python has quirks as well.  And the other way around
too, I saw nice ideas in Python mode which Vim did not support, and
vice-versa.  It seems there is a wall between both universes! :-)

> If Mark Hammonds Windows editor does it, I don't see why Emacs and vi
> shouldn't.

I know, for having worked at a Python code reformatter (in Python, of
course!), that proper presentation of Python source may be tricky.
If all involved people were able to agree on the same presentation
principles, it would be nice seeking a common solution for many editors.
Could even become part of the standard library, who knows! :-)

-- 
François Pinard   http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~pinard