XPost: alt.comp.os.windows-10, alt.comp.software.firefox   
   From: newyana@invalid.nospam   
      
   On 1/18/2025 9:25 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:   
   > On 2025-01-18 15:09, Newyana2 wrote:   
   >> On 1/18/2025 1:47 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:   
   >>> On Wed, 15 Jan 2025 13:49:44 -0500, Newyana2 wrote:   
   >   
   > ...   
   >   
   >>     What these editors   
   >> advertise is endless code language support. If I remember correctly,   
   >> Notepad++ claims to support 50+ languages, and more can be added.   
   >> So they're being billed as code editors. No one serious about coding   
   >> a particular language would use such a generic tool.   
   >   
   > Well, this is not true. Most Linux programmers use vi or emacs.   
      
        Most Linux fans, maybe. They're adamantly dedicated to   
   old-style tools and command line. But what are they writing?   
   Shell scripts? Maybe a little Perl? That's not programming code.   
   It's more like IT work. Anyone doing programming would likely   
   want an IDE if they can have it.   
      
      What we were talking about here was HTML. I very much doubt   
   that the average Linux fan is writing HTML. It's too rich and   
   colorful for their taste. If they do write HTML to do anything more   
   than very simple formatting then there would be no benefit in   
   using Notepad++, Emacs, etc. Even writing very simple HTML there's   
   little reason to use those editors. They offer only rudimentary   
   color-coding. If you're *really* writing HTML then you want the   
   extras.   
      
        I think there are two issues here. One is what's the best tool   
   for the job. Emacs can be OK for limited code writing where a   
   bit of colorcoding is helpful. But like the other generic editors, it   
   doesn't offer specialized tools for particular languages. So it's a   
   swiss army knife for small jobs.   
      
        The other issue is irrational, emotional attachment. That's what   
   makes people have tantrums about reasonable requests like having   
   a GUI for system settings in the 21st century. Those console window   
   fanatics are not doing it because it's the best tool. They're doing   
   it because they came of age (or their grandfather did) at a time   
   when men were men and men used console, because it's all there   
   was. Now they think console is more authentic or more macho. It   
   also serves as a kind of hazing challenge. They don't want computers   
   to be easy to use because then their skills would have little value.   
      
      Those same partially socialized, 60 year old Linux teenagers are   
   also fanatic about their choice of vi or emacs. ("No, the names are   
   not capitalized. Fuck you, you Windoze wimps. Capital letters are for   
   losers. If you can tell me what gnu stands for, and why that's cool,   
   then we might let you into our clubhouse.") It's like 12-year-olds with   
   secret decoder rings.   
      
       I had a friend back in the early 2000s who was a software project   
   manager. She did very well. Apparently few people are well suited to   
   managing anti-social geeks. .Net had recently come out but it was   
   booming. I asked my friend why .Net was so popular and Java was   
   not, despite being well established. Without hesitation she answered,   
   "The tools." That made sense. Microsoft have always bent over   
   backward to provide very good tools for people of varying levels of   
   expertise. When Visual Studio came out there was nothing else like   
   it. .Net, again, was designed to be RAD, usable, and not too hard   
   to learn.   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)