On 30.08.2024 21:20, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Aug 2024 08:14:21 -0700
> John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> gabbled:
>>> [...]
>> Sure - but picking one that best suits your needs doesn't mean you
>> can't critique its annoyances/flaws. This team-sports mentality is just
>> weird.
>
> Some insecure people feel an attack on their favourite language is some kind
> of attack or slight against them personally. Its a pathetic and juvenile trait
> that unfortunately is found a lot amongst IT types.

It's not restricted to languages or IT-stuff; you can see it with
books or films or music or political or religious preferences...

In IT we had as well various "wars" in the past. More considerate
folks avoid such wars (and respect diversity of thoughts/opinions
and preferences) by focusing on the facts alone. Other folks feel
an urge to (unnecessarily) ignite them.

Janis

On Sat, 14 Sep 2024 10:16:35 +0200
Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> gabbled:
>On 30.08.2024 21:20, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>> On Fri, 30 Aug 2024 08:14:21 -0700
>> John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> gabbled:
>>>> [...]
>>> Sure - but picking one that best suits your needs doesn't mean you
>>> can't critique its annoyances/flaws. This team-sports mentality is just
>>> weird.
>>
>> Some insecure people feel an attack on their favourite language is some kind
>> of attack or slight against them personally. Its a pathetic and juvenile
>trait
>> that unfortunately is found a lot amongst IT types.
>
>It's not restricted to languages or IT-stuff; you can see it with
>books or films or music or political or religious preferences...

True. Usually people with fragile egos and/or low self esteem who validate
themselves via some belief or preference.

On Sat, 14 Sep 2024 10:06:12 +0200, Janis Papanagnou wrote:

> On 30.08.2024 04:53, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>> Emacs makes no such assumption, and can also edit non-text files.
>
> You have obviously no clue.

I have actually used it for that. That’s my “clue” to you.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
>On Sat, 14 Sep 2024 10:06:12 +0200, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
>
>> On 30.08.2024 04:53, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>
>>> Emacs makes no such assumption, and can also edit non-text files.
>>
>> You have obviously no clue.
>
>I have actually used it for that. That’s my “clue” to you.

You elided context to make a bogus point. Typical.

>>On 30.08.2024 04:53, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
LDO: >> Vim is only good for text-editing, though.

>
Janis:> You have obviously no clue.

Janis is correct, you have no clue

$ man vim | grep -i binary

-b Binary mode. A few options will be set that makes it possible to edit a binary or executable file.

On Sat, 14 Sep 2024 19:10:06 GMT, Scott Lurndal wrote:

> $ man vim | grep -i binary
>
> -b Binary mode. A few options will be set that makes it
> possible to edit a binary or executable file.

Wow, a special mode just to edit binary files, when Emacs can do it in
its regular mode.

More on vim’s “binary” mode here
<https://vi.stackexchange.com/questions/343/how-to-edit-binary-files-with-vim>:
It just sets a bunch of options to minimize the chance of screwing up
the file in ways you don’t want. Apart from that, it’s still editing
it as a text file.

On Sat, 14 Sep 2024 22:25:53 -0000 (UTC)
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> boringly babbled:
>On Sat, 14 Sep 2024 19:10:06 GMT, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>
>> $ man vim | grep -i binary
>>
>> -b Binary mode. A few options will be set that makes it
>> possible to edit a binary or executable file.
>
>Wow, a special mode just to edit binary files, when Emacs can do it in
>its regular mode.

The 1980s phoned, they want their editor wars back.

>It just sets a bunch of options to minimize the chance of screwing up
>the file in ways you don’t want. Apart from that, it’s still editing
>it as a text file.

Any sane person uses a dedicated hex editor to edit binary files, not vim
or emacs.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
>On Sat, 14 Sep 2024 19:10:06 GMT, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>
>> $ man vim | grep -i binary
>>
>> -b Binary mode. A few options will be set that makes it
>> possible to edit a binary or executable file.
>
>Wow, a special mode just to edit binary files

So, you admit you were wrong. You again elided the con-text that showed
you were incorrect. Dishonest of you, to be sure, yet typical of your
posts.

On 2024-09-14, Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:
> LDO: >> Vim is only good for text-editing, though.
>
>>
> Janis:> You have obviously no clue.
>
> Janis is correct, you have no clue
>
> $ man vim | grep -i binary
>
> -b Binary mode. A few options will be set that makes it possible to edit a binary or executable file.

I use Vim for dynamically syntax-coloring code served by CGIT.

You heard right.

When CGIT presents code out of a repository, it calls a script
in order to convert it to colorized HTML. That script can be customized.

Mine uses expect to run Vim to load the file, set a few settings, and
invoke the :TOhtml command to dump HTML.

That is then post-proocessed to remove the inline style sheet. The web
page it gets embedded into has its own CSS rules for the Vim-generated
HTML tags.

--
TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr
Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal
Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca

On 14/09/2024 10:16, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
> On 30.08.2024 21:20, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>> On Fri, 30 Aug 2024 08:14:21 -0700
>> John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> gabbled:
>>>> [...]
>>> Sure - but picking one that best suits your needs doesn't mean you
>>> can't critique its annoyances/flaws. This team-sports mentality is just
>>> weird.
>>
>> Some insecure people feel an attack on their favourite language is some kind
>> of attack or slight against them personally. Its a pathetic and juvenile trait
>> that unfortunately is found a lot amongst IT types.
>
> It's not restricted to languages or IT-stuff; you can see it with
> books or films or music or political or religious preferences...
>
> In IT we had as well various "wars" in the past. More considerate
> folks avoid such wars (and respect diversity of thoughts/opinions
> and preferences) by focusing on the facts alone. Other folks feel
> an urge to (unnecessarily) ignite them.
>

Fair enough. I apologise for igniting Muttley.

On 14/09/2024 09:59, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
> On 29.08.2024 21:36, David Brown wrote:
>> On 29/08/2024 18:44, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
>>> On 29.08.2024 14:30, David Brown wrote:
>>>> On 29/08/2024 09:28, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>> Then don't use vim - use an editor that suits your needs.
>>> [...]
>>
>>> But what makes you think that his needs are not covered by Vim?
>>
>> You seem to have missed the point - sorry if I was not clear.
>>
>> He complained that he didn't want to learn complicated macros in Vim
>> just to be able to indent or un-indent lines of code. The solution is
>> obvious - he should use an editor other than Vim.
>
> This is not what I'd call a solution. I'd call it elusion; and in both
> senses - if he didn't use his editor for that space-indenting because
> he doesn't know how to do it he could look that up, but it is not any
> issue to do that, only more laborious than indenting brace structures,
> and the suggestion to switch to another tool is also elusive because
> it doesn't address the issue (he would still have to learn how to do
> it in any other tool). - But that was not the point.
>

This thread died out two weeks ago, and should have been left there.

I didn't suggest he switch to a different tool - I suggested he /didn't/
switch to a tool that he didn't want to learn. But I do think it is
worth learning some of the basic features of the tools you use regularly.

That is all completely independent of what anyone likes or dislikes
about a particular aspect of any particular language.

On Sun, 15 Sep 2024, Scott Lurndal wrote:

> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
>> On Sat, 14 Sep 2024 19:10:06 GMT, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>
>>> $ man vim | grep -i binary
>>>
>>> -b Binary mode. A few options will be set that makes it
>>> possible to edit a binary or executable file.
>>
>> Wow, a special mode just to edit binary files
>
> So, you admit you were wrong. You again elided the con-text that showed
> you were incorrect. Dishonest of you, to be sure, yet typical of your
> posts.
>

This is Lawrence, and that is his bread and butter. Just killfile and move
on.

On Sun, 15 Sep 2024 15:51:16 GMT, Scott Lurndal wrote:

> You again elided the con-text that showed you were incorrect.

You left out this:

More on vim’s “binary” mode here
<https://vi.stackexchange.com/questions/343/how-to-edit-binary-files-with-
vim>:
It just sets a bunch of options to minimize the chance of screwing up the
file in ways you don’t want. Apart from that, it’s still editing it as a
text file.

On Sun, 15 Sep 2024 21:47:13 +0200
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> boringly babbled:
>On 14/09/2024 09:59, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
>> On 29.08.2024 21:36, David Brown wrote:
>>> On 29/08/2024 18:44, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
>>>> On 29.08.2024 14:30, David Brown wrote:
>>>>> On 29/08/2024 09:28, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>
>>>>> Then don't use vim - use an editor that suits your needs.
>>>> [...]
>>>
>>>> But what makes you think that his needs are not covered by Vim?
>>>
>>> You seem to have missed the point - sorry if I was not clear.
>>>
>>> He complained that he didn't want to learn complicated macros in Vim
>>> just to be able to indent or un-indent lines of code. The solution is
>>> obvious - he should use an editor other than Vim.
>>
>> This is not what I'd call a solution. I'd call it elusion; and in both
>> senses - if he didn't use his editor for that space-indenting because
>> he doesn't know how to do it he could look that up, but it is not any
>> issue to do that, only more laborious than indenting brace structures,
>> and the suggestion to switch to another tool is also elusive because
>> it doesn't address the issue (he would still have to learn how to do
>> it in any other tool). - But that was not the point.
>>
>
>This thread died out two weeks ago, and should have been left there.

To be fair it should have been left in the 1990s.

On 15.09.2024 11:06, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Sep 2024 22:25:53 -0000 (UTC)
> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> boringly babbled:
>> [...]
>
> Any sane person uses a dedicated hex editor to edit binary files, not vim
> or emacs.

I suppose you may be right. (Or maybe not?)

Frankly, I rarely edited binary files [with any editor]; for me
that's at best a corner case, and at worst a wrong approach (in
some cases I've seen).

But, to be honest, in the few cases where I did binary editings
I was glad that I could just use the editor I'm used to. And in
such cases I resorted to :!xxd ... sort of data handling from
within the editor I use (Vi/Vim).

Janis

On 14.09.2024 11:34, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Sep 2024 10:06:12 +0200, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
>
>> On 30.08.2024 04:53, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>
>>> Emacs makes no such assumption, and can also edit non-text files.
>>
>> You have obviously no clue.
>
> I have actually used it for that. That’s my “clue” to you.

Yes, I've also edited binary files with Vim. - That's no news.
So what's the "clue"?

Janis

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 22:48 this Saturday (GMT):
> On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 18:30:03 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
>
>> Subjectively, I prefer early returns over nested ifs:
>
> Nested ifs nest, early returns don’t.

Right, they remove some nesting which makes it easier to read.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

On Thu, 26 Sep 2024 18:00:09 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:

> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 22:48 this Saturday (GMT):
>
>> On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 18:30:03 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
>>
>>> Subjectively, I prefer early returns over nested ifs:
>>
>> Nested ifs nest, early returns don’t.
>
> Right, they remove some nesting which makes it easier to read.

Nestability helps with refactorability.

On Thu, 26 Sep 2024 20:36:11 -0000 (UTC)
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> boringly babbled:
>On Thu, 26 Sep 2024 18:00:09 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
>
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 22:48 this Saturday (GMT):
>>
>>> On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 18:30:03 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>
>>>> Subjectively, I prefer early returns over nested ifs:
>>>
>>> Nested ifs nest, early returns don’t.
>>
>> Right, they remove some nesting which makes it easier to read.
>
>Nestability helps with refactorability.

Hell it does. All it helps with is making the code harder to follow.

On 2024-09-15, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Sep 2024 22:25:53 -0000 (UTC)
> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> boringly babbled:
>>On Sat, 14 Sep 2024 19:10:06 GMT, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>
>>> $ man vim | grep -i binary
>>>
>>> -b Binary mode. A few options will be set that makes it
>>> possible to edit a binary or executable file.
>>
>>Wow, a special mode just to edit binary files, when Emacs can do it in
>>its regular mode.
>
> The 1980s phoned, they want their editor wars back.
>
>>It just sets a bunch of options to minimize the chance of screwing up
>>the file in ways you don’t want. Apart from that, it’s still editing
>>it as a text file.
>
> Any sane person uses a dedicated hex editor to edit binary files, not vim
> or emacs.
>

Emacs has the hexl-mode. Emacs isn't just an editor, it's an Elisp platform.

On 2024-08-19, Dmitry A. Kazakov <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> wrote:
> On 2024-08-19 16:59, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 12:39:33 +0200
>
>>> Initially an ability to trim the system and sometimes to patch a driver
>>> was a huge advantage Linux had over Windows NT.
>>
>> Linux can also load and unload drivers on the fly unlike Windows which AFAIK
>> still requires a reboot each time.
>
> I was talking about monolithic kernel Linux had in 90's. Plug and play,
> kernel modules came much later with much bigger machines. I ran Linux on
> i386 25MHz 4Mb. Try it now.
>

You could load and unload drivers since slackware 4 and before,
even under a 386.

On 2024-08-21, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Aug 2024 09:26:41 +0200, David Brown wrote:
>
>> And you don't need to know anything about Linux, UNIX or POSIX to
>> program in C.
>
> I think the point has been made on comp.lang.c more than once, that C
> without POSIX can be a very dull language indeed ...

The C Programming Language 2nd. Ed is not about POSIX, and you can do
a lot with C99. Albeit I prefer Elisp and Common Lisp.

On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 20:04:52 -0000 (UTC), Bozo User wrote:

>> Any sane person uses a dedicated hex editor to edit binary files, not
>> vim or emacs.
>>
> Emacs has the hexl-mode. Emacs isn't just an editor, it's an Elisp
> platform.

Hex mode is an option. It’s not required. It so happens the kind of
editing I was doing worked best the way I did it.

Emacs offers you the choice, alternative editors don’t.

On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 20:04:54 -0000 (UTC), Bozo User wrote:

> On 2024-08-21, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 21 Aug 2024 09:26:41 +0200, David Brown wrote:
>>
>>> And you don't need to know anything about Linux, UNIX or POSIX to
>>> program in C.
>>
>> I think the point has been made on comp.lang.c more than once, that C
>> without POSIX can be a very dull language indeed ...
>
> ... you can do a lot with C99.

Up to a point. This is the thing: every once in a while, a discussion
about some supposed C feature will founder on the discovery that it is
actually a POSIX feature, not available with standard C on non-POSIX
platforms.

Hang around comp.lang.c for a month or so, and you’ll see what I mean.

> Albeit I prefer Elisp and Common Lisp.

I use lots of languages, including C and JavaScript. I use Elisp to
customize Emacs, and Python for lots of other things. I have even dabbled
with Smalltalk.