On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 10:14 AM, sqweek <sqweek@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 11:12 PM, Wendell xe <wendellxe@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > My nutshell evaluation of Acme is that it is for systems-level coding in
> C on modest-sized projects. It seems very well designed for that purpose but
> quickly becomes awkward as you move away. It is definitely not suited to
> working with Java or Lisp,
>
>  I used to feel much the same. Then I went back to coding java at
> work, fired up eclipse and was like "... where's my chording? :( :(".
> I had to whip up a plumbing rule so I could button 3 stack traces, but
> after that it was pretty comfortable. I keep switching between them
> now, generally using eclipse for browsing existing code or when using
> a lot of interfaces that I'm not familiar with (function completion =
> lazy way out), and acme when I want to view files side by side
> (eclipse's "window management" can bite me) or when eclipse annoys me
> too much with its highlights and tooltips and ctrl-w closing the
> window and automatic paren balancing and popups and underlines and
> FUCK OFF I KNOW THE FUNCTION NEEDS TO RETURN A BOOLEAN I'M HALFWAY
> THROUGH DEFINING IT GIVE ME A CHANCE JEEZE. ...which is somewhat
> often.


Hmmm acme plumbing rule for lisp s-expressions... that'd be neat :-)

As I've never written a plumbing rule in my life, I'm not sure how practical
that is.  (just haven't needed to do it...)

The only thing I'd miss in Acme vs emacs then, most likely, for lisp-like
languages is paren-matching.

And I'd miss it dearly.