Message-Id: <199801242041.JAA07453@cirrostratus.netaccess.co.nz>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <chapmic5 AT pop3 DOT netaccess DOT co DOT nz>
From: "Richard Chappell" <chapmic5 AT cirrostratus DOT netaccess DOT co DOT nz>
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 1998 08:33:40 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: Is RHIDE a good environment to use?
Reply-to: Pixnaps AT netaccess DOT co DOT nz
In-reply-to: <34C695AF.64E3@cs.com>
Precedence: bulk

> I have been following the posts of this group on and off for about 
> year
> now.  I know that there has been some debate as to which 
> environment users
> of djgpp should use: RHIDE or EMACS?
> 
> Which do you prefer?  and why?

I've never used EMACS, so I don't know what it's like, but I use 
RHIDE, and it works perfectly well for me! EMACS (from what I've 
heard) has more fancy stuff, but I think it takes up a lot more HDD 
space than RHIDE does.