logs archiveIRC Archive / Freenode / #emacs / 2010 / March / 2 / 4
rgr
read the source Luke ....
jordanb
Wow.
I'd like to subscribe to your newsletter.
Piratero
I always call emacs with the '-nw' flag. Is there a way to explicitly have this without the use of aliases?
bob2
unset DISPLAY
twb
Compile Emacs without X support.
Piratero
twb: Oh, right... that didn't dawn upon me... thanks.
Sketch
if you're using a distro package, many distros also have seperate packages for emacs with and without X
Piratero
Sketch: Yeah, I thought about that. I should look this up. Thanks.
I'm planning on moving to a more sane distro soon. Arch Linux seems a bit too messy for my taste.
I hate the fact that a lot of ditros use bash as their default for init scripts.
kenyon
,twb-fix
         

fsbot
Most problems can be solved by installing Debian.
Piratero
That's true. But I don't like Debian's "unoptimized" compiled packages.
I tried fighting it. I lost.
bob2
lol
poor cpu-bound emacs
Piratero
O(n^2)? :-P
Actually, ©(n^2).
defn
zsh < bash
everyone uses bash. zsh isn't POSIX compliant. zsh has nice features which are all available with a little hackery in bash.
i dont understand the zsh love.
kenyon
try it
twb
Piratero: "unoptimized" as in you're running x86 instead of x86-64 still?
Piratero
twb: Yes sir.
twb
defn: theoretically, at least, some stuff like completion is more powerful in zsh
Piratero
I guess I'm coming from the "Gentoo" side.
twb
defn: I don't Sapir-Whorf need it
Piratero
zsh not being POSIX compliant is a problem for me.
defn
same
POSIX is a req. for a shell. it just has to be.
Piratero
I actually use TCSH and write POSIX SH scripts.
Is BASH really POSIX compliant?
kenyon
wow, tcsh
Piratero
Yeah...
I think I might switch for BASH again.
kenyon
Piratero: didn't you know http://www.faqs.org/faqs/unix-faq/shell/csh-whynot/
Piratero
kenyon: I have that bookmarked. Hence me writing SH scripts :-)
I have tons of small scripts in ~/bin
defn
bash --posix
kenyon
Piratero: ohh my bad, I read you as "use TCSH *to* write..."
         

Piratero
kenyon: Oh, no. TCSH is just my default shell.
defn
((..)) is not posix compliant
Piratero
$(())?
defn
that behavior is unspecified i believe
Piratero
I thought it was compilant...
I use it on all my scripts.
defn
oh yours is compliant IIRC
i was just saying ((...)), the nesting of two subshells is not posix
Piratero
Oh.
defn
bash is Posix.2 i think
yeah thats right
kenyon
Piratero: but anyway, your small scripts in ~/bin have nothing to do with your login shell, unless you are sourcing them
Piratero
kenyon: Yeah, I have "#!/bin/sh"
kenyon
so why is zsh not being POSIX compliant a problem for you?
Piratero
I would rather not use it. That's all.
rgr
kenyon: in a sentence, why do you buck the trend and insist on zsh which next to no one else uses?
(posix complicance means jack to me since I want them "my machine complient" ;))
kenyon
rgr: next to no one uses is quite an exaggeration
rgr
not really.
kenyon
well whatever, I don't care how many people use a thing
rgr
I mean I have used Linux for about 4 years now and never met one person who uses it and almost never come acorss it in Linux articles or help channels
kenyon
that's not long
rgr
I'm saying you should, but why zsh?
bob2
because zsh users are all self sufficient
kenyon
I didn't start using zsh until I had been using linux for like 8 years
rgr
Its long enough for me to get some idea of relative usage of various things.
thats good, but were not comparing di*ks, I was just wondering why zsh.
kenyon
I'm just correcting your exaggeration
rgr
what exaggeration?
realtive to bash next to no one uses zsh.
bob2
lol
relative to water, no one uses bash
rgr
well, I guess we can play clever games with words, but zsh is a minority.
And my question seems reaosnable enough : why zsh?
kenyon
lots of reasons. the one I miss most when I use bash is tab completion of command history
rgr
I'm not knocking it, just intersted. I see you mentioning issues or whatever with zsh for a while now and just wonder why you chose a minority program. It must excel in something.
bash has that
C-r
kenyon
nope
bob2
prompt flexibility, mod-p, mod-q, broader completion support, better scripting, spelling correction, rm * timeout expansion
ctrl-r is somethign else
bash has absorbed some but not all of zsh's features
rgr
sure, but doesnt it do the same thing?
kenyon
C-r is also better in zsh than bash
bob2
so "inertia + 1000 lines of zshrc" is probably a popular reason, too
rgr
ok, so for you the editing facilities are better? That makes some sense.
bob2
better globbing
paging of completions
kenyon
editing facilitis, more like all interactive facilities
rgr
since I write most of my scripts in an editor I doubt those things have much attraction.
bob2
none of those really have anything to do with editing scripts
rgr
C-r does enough for history recall for me.
bob2: exactly.
bob2
so I'm not sure why you mentioned that
rgr
in other words my personal usage would not benefit from nitro injected CLI editing ;)
kenyon
well there you go, some people use the CLI more
rgr
err, I know.
kenyon
and they may be more attracted to zsh I guess
rgr
I use it a fari bit, but find I'm happy enough genreally with bash, I will read up on zsh.
argh, google mail pages totally fek up conkeror even with their shortcuts disabled.
kenyon
it's not something you can switch to in a day, like emacs, it can be a continual learning and tweaking process
snogglethorpe
rgr: afaik, cedet does that sort of thing because the built-in support wasn't originally powerful enough
rgr: given that situation, a dev can (1) give up (2) complain loudly (3) work with upstream to enhance the core support or (4) implement everything himself and don't mention it to anyway
i gather the cedet guy is type-4
rgr
heh
snogglethorpe
which is one reason he got so far of course
rgr
possibly. auto-complete has now deserted semantic support. company-mode doesnt seem to work with it but says it does. I dunno. So much potential if these things worked together. But then I like completion and context help and semantic navigation.
snogglethorpe
roll up your sleeves and get to work i suppose
probably it needs somebody to rip out a lot of the builtin stuff and reimplement it using standard facilities
rgr
or someone to lift up their head and say "oh look, there is already an open project which does this, lets work together", Cedet is horribly complex.
kenyon: yeah, wow, I see what you mean about history handling in zsh
defn
i dont know anything about cedet beyond that i need it for rudel and jde
Sketch
<kenyon> C-r is also better in zsh than bash
i found it worse
that was my biggest problem with zsh
it's been so long since i tried it that i don't remember why it was worse, though
ryomanolonger
(Action) just wishes there were really good shell options in emacs with no bugs and somehow dynamically switching between term and shell or something
rgr
defn: how is jde? Last time I tried it you needed a degree in patching ;)
WOW! its working. cool.
(Action) takes back his comments about company-mode and scrunches his cap in worship ....
there was a newer company-mode
ryomanolonger
is that hard to set up?
rgr
company?
ryomanolonger
yes
rgr
not now I have it working, cleared out old crap (bloofy nxhtml had its own version ...)
2 lines
(add-to-list 'load-path "~/.emacs.d/company-mode")
(require 'company)
(global-company-mode)
three lines
and enable gaudy cedet helpers.
I dotn know how its overriding the built in cedet completions but it seems to do it fine now.
defn
i built emacs from source. it is 415mb
what can i remove to lighten that up
kenyon
the emacs binary is 415 MB?
defn
no ive built the binary, but doesnt emacs rely on some of the stuff in the emacs/src dir?
emacs source directory on whole, like doc/ etc/
twb
defn: all the libraries that you don't use
Obviously
defn
heh, trying to decide what i can safely remove...
twb
Though you ought to re-make Emacs after doing so, in order to regenerate the autoload file
You can also generate an emacs binary that has the lisp files you use pre-loaded into it, and then throw away the .el.gz and .elc files
quotemstr
Evening, #emacs.
Coke
Hello. I'm getting a weird warning when trying to use downcase-region
What can function should I use to downcase a region of text as it should be written in regular english?
(i.e first letter capital, then all commons)
Or can I just enable the downcase-region command?
mjrosenb
hey, does anyone know how to syntax hilighting elisp?
bob2
it does it by default
kenyon
mjrosenb: emacs-lisp-mode?
bob2
in emacs22+
mjrosenb
no, like
the code that goes into haskell-font-lock.el
it has some comments, but i cannot figure out how the comments relate to the elisp
kenyon
Coke: maybe you want ,,auto-capitalize
fsbot
From memory, auto-capitalize.el is at http://www.emacswiki.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?auto-capitalize.el
snogglethorpe
hm "streck -- a unit of angle measurement used in the Swedish military, equal to 1/17.5 degree"
defn
what does building emacs with --disable-locallisppath do?
Coke
kenyon: aI dont have that function
well, it's called just "capitalize-region"
however, I want the opposite
I want all the letters to be commons, except the first one ofcourse.
defn
anyone know?
what does building emacs with --disable-locallisppath do?
mee
is there any reason to use 22 over 23?
I'm confused my major linux distros seem to install 22 by default, providing 23 as a seperate package
s/my/why my/
bob2
which distro?
mee
sigh. too late at night. "I'm confused why major ..."
ubuntu, debian
bob2
debian's default is 23
mee
oh, sorry I am totally wrong
I just got confused by apt
bob2
heh
kenyon
well, debian stable is still at 22, unless you use backports.
mee
the package metadata lists emacs22 as the source package, and emacs22-{gtk,nox,etc.} as dependencies, but 23.1 the version it installs
now I'm just convinced the deptree is just schizo. Time for sleep. g'night
rodrigo3n
hello everyone
i want to know if its possible to change the default "scratch"
buffer on emacs
i'm using topfunky's emacs-starter-kit.
quicksilver
is there an elisp idiom for haskell's filter? That is, all elements of a list for which a predicate returns true?
bob2
there is a filter that seems to do the same thing
quicksilver
,,df filter
fsbot
Nooo! Symbol's function definition is void: filter
quicksilver
are you sure? ;)
bob2
from rst.el
which I think is in 23
maybe only cvs
quicksilver
hmm, I have rst.el
but it wasn't loaded
no 'filter' in it.
twb
quicksilver: probably remove-if-not from cl-macs
quicksilver
twb: thank you
funny how language cultures differ
twb
rst.el is a REALLY bad place to look for idioms -- it's written by python people trying to reinvent python in elisp
quicksilver
elisp seems to be missing some obvious-to-me combinators
(I'm sure the converse would be true of an elisp hacker trying haskell)
twb
There are no elisp hackers
« prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 next »