Re: organizing deep source trees with child packages

[Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>]

Bill Findlay <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk> writes:

> On 18/10/2011 19:57, in article m21uuaruu7.fsf@pushface.org, "Simon Wright"
> <simon@pushface.org> wrote:
>
>> Ludovic Brenta <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org> writes:
>> 
>>> Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org> writes:
>>>> "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> writes:
>>>>> You know, Emacs users and us, the others, represent different
>>>>> species. I'm certain that a scientific study would show that these
>>>>> don't even interbreed. Each Emacs user must have been abducted by
>>>>> aliens in flying saucers... (:-))
>>>> 
>>>> I think the alien part may be the answer. We certainly don't seem
>>>> to breed true (I only have two data points for this statement :-))
>>> 
>>> I've been an avid emacs user (indeed I am typing this post in emacs
>>> right now) since 2000, and my 5-year-old son learned how to type his
>>> name in the *scratch* buffer of emacs.  How is that for a data
>>> point? :)
>> 
>> Hmm, both my daughters were born before the GNU Emacs project started
>> (1984 according to Wikipedia), so perhaps it's no wonder!
>
> I'll enrage both of the warring camps, but I see little difference
> between emacs and vi: both are feeble attempts to simulate a proper
> GUI editor.

Bill, in this case the "camps" are Emacs and (I think) GPS. For once vi
doesn't feature!

> I first encountered emacs in the late 1970s, on our Unix V7 PDP-11/45.
> That machine had 248K of RAM.  Emacs was several times bigger than the
> entire store, which supported 16 users well (if emacs was not running)
> or one user badly (when emacs was running).  I saw no good reason for
> that extravagance and have not changed my mind since.

I've just opened GPS, and it's running at 117 Mb (the X11 server I
wouldn't be running otherwise is at 27 Mb).

Emacs (open for days, including this newsreader) is at 104 Mb.

Safari is top at >600 Mb! (Safari + Safari Web Content).