Best editor?

[François Pinard]

[John J. Lee]
> François Pinard <pinard at iro.umontreal.ca> writes:
> [...]
> > Overall, Vim is also cleaner than Emacs, and this pleases me.
> [...]

> Is this still true when comparing XEmacs vs. vim? (rather than
> GNU Emacs vs. vim) I've always used GNU Emacs, but I have got the
> impression that XEmacs is (was?) cleaner in some ways.

I have much less experience with XEmacs.  One friend of mine (Horvje) is
quite involved in XEmacs development, and he convinced me to give it a
serious and honest try.  I did, yet never as deeply as I learned Emacs.

My feeling has been that XEmacs, despite cleaner and offering a lot, in
the realm of attractive chrome and original features, is slower overall
and a bit less stable than GNU Emacs (Richard just _hates_ when one
opposes XEmacs to GNU Emacs, and by doing so, involuntarily suggesting
that XEmacs might not be "GNU"!  But I'm not in GNU politics nowadays!
:-). What most discouraged me is that fact that, at the time of my
tries, neither Allout nor RMAIL were supported, both of which I was
heavily using[1].  And also a few other gooddies as well.

I know from users that Pymacs, which allows for Python usage from within
Emacs, is supported in XEmacs just as well as in GNU Emacs.

--------
[1] Now in Vim, I switched from RMAIL to plain `mbox', and now use Mutt
as a mail user agent -- which I find blazingly speedy even on big folders.
For Allout, I rewrote an Allout support for Vim, as I could not
walk away from it -- alternative solutions were too heavy.

-- 
François Pinard   http://pinard.progiciels-bpi.ca