From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id VAA32598; Fri, 30 Jul 2004 21:26:08 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id VAA32242 for ; Fri, 30 Jul 2004 21:26:07 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from outbound28-2.lax.untd.com (outbound28-2.lax.untd.com [64.136.28.160]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id i6UJQ5EV018087 for ; Fri, 30 Jul 2004 21:26:06 +0200 Received: from outbound28-2.lax.untd.com (smtp03.lax.untd.com [10.130.24.123]) by smtpout01.lax.untd.com with SMTP id AABASXJFSAKS7HQJ for (sender ); Fri, 30 Jul 2004 12:25:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 27802 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2004 19:25:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO vangogh) (66.52.252.15) by smtp03.lax.untd.com with SMTP; 30 Jul 2004 19:25:27 -0000 From: "Brandon J. Van Every" To: "caml" Subject: [Caml-list] XEmacs or GNU Emacs? Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2004 12:35:54 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Importance: Normal X-ContentStamp: 3:4:3784624232 X-UNTD-OriginStamp: CI84cOLHFqh7Zd2QWkwvEFvwyO3T/pIsFsCrOjjLH845zxad9rfLhQ+dCCl+rqfL X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 410AA0CD.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; brandon:99 caml-list:01 bayesian:01 crap:01 crap:01 unboxed:01 bigarray:01 ocaml:01 ocaml:01 emacs:01 emacs:01 overhead:03 coding:03 group:04 wondering:04 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk Does either XEmacs or GNU Emacs have any particular advantage to an OCaml developer on Windows 2000? I'm becoming aware that there's a lot of politics about them, but hopefully people around here are disinterested and only concerned with what makes OCaml coding easier. Again, I'm doing Windows. Cheers, www.indiegamedesign.com Brand*n Van Every S*attle, WA Praise Be to the caml-list Bayesian filter! It blesseth my postings, it is evil crap! evil crap! Bigarray! Unboxed overhead group! Wondering! chant chant chant... ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners