From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-Id: <200206101547.g5AFlLW03706@aubrey.stanford.edu> From: "James A. Robinson" To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] Emacs In-reply-to: Message from Blake McBride of "Mon, 10 Jun 2002 14:10:13 GMT."References: Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 08:47:21 -0700 Topicbox-Message-UUID: a8a244e8-eaca-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 If you're happy with emacs, and think it is perfect for all your needs, you probably won't instantly love sam or acme. I used to love emacs, but it got to the point where the joints in my fingers started to hurt all the time. I moved off emacs to wily (an acme pseudo clone) and then to sam. I've found sam very useful (and would probably find the new acme with it's sam-like Edit function even more useful). Most of what you list is not built into either tool. No registers, no macros, etc. It certainly has a powerful search/replace functionality (I think they are much nicer than the regex search/replace in emacs), and the shell scripting functionality with it's default selection/operation modes makes it all very powerful. But still, if you've made up your mind in advance that the way emacs does things is the best way for you, then you probably won't get much out of the different models acme and sam offer. They are different, that's the best response I can think of to your question. Jim