Message-Id: <m0vkrHa-000S1mC@natacha.inti.edu.ar>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <salvador AT natacha DOT inti DOT edu DOT ar>
From: "Salvador Eduardo Tropea (SET)" <salvador AT natacha DOT inti DOT edu DOT ar>
Organization: INTI
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>, djgpp AT delorie DOT com,
        afn03257 AT freenet3 DOT afn DOT org
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 16:01:05 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: RHIDE -- joy of my life :)

Hi Eli:

> >  I agree 80% with Eli, if you want a full configurable thing go for Emacs, you 
> Just curious: would you care to tell what are the 20% that you disagree?

  Well, Robert allready have a configuration system through enviroment variables, 
and I guess isn't much difficult make it work, but with some friendly 
interface, that makes configurable the "make" of RHIDE. I'll include some 
configurable syntax highlight and scripting (in some month). So as you can see 
I can't say that I think that RHIDE must be static, but I agree that not so 
configurable as Emacs, I don't plan to write a SETLisp interpreter ;-).

> > 3) Time: I don't know how many people made Emacs (or a similar thing)
> I estimate that Emacs gets contributions from about two dozen people who 
> constantly add features, plus a lot of others who do that occasionally.  
> That's the primary reason that no other editor could ever beat Emacs in 
> functionality: everything you can possibly think of is already there (or 
> will be in the next release).

  Just what I guessed.

SET 
--------------- 0 --------------------------------
Salvador Eduardo Tropea (SET).
Address: Curapaligue 2124, Caseros, 3 de Febrero
Buenos Aires, (1678), ARGENTINA
TE: +(541) 759 0013