Re: No automatic tabs in Emacs?

[Pascal J. Bourguignon]

Elena <egarrulo@gmail.com> writes:

> On Dec 7, 1:52 pm, "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <p...@informatimago.com>
> wrote:
>> Elena <egarr...@gmail.com> writes:
>> > On Dec 7, 1:07 pm, Helmut Eller <eller.hel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> That the IDE forces me to use a particular editor isn't exactly an
>> >> efficiency booster. Those tools could technically just as well
>> >> communicate with Emacs or VI instead of being "integrated" with a single
>> >> editor of a particular IDE.
>>
>> > Agreed.  That's the downside of using IDEs.  Their tools are tightly
>> > integrated such that  their advanced features are not available
>> > outside of the IDE.
>>
>> > I agree that IDEs do not get everything right.  However, they provide
>> > a time-tested work-flow.  
>>
>> I never found an IDE that got anything right.  What has been time
>> tested, is their total inadequacy for anything beyond toys and school
>> examples.
>
> You are being too harsh.  IDEs got right:
> - generation of a skeleton for organizing your project sources;

There's skeleton-mode and various other template insertion commands.
For the organization of project sources, I wrote my own commands, since
I have my own project organization rules.


> - a tidy frame configuration;

If you don't fight it, emacs frame configuration is tidy and foremost,
works automatically.


> - easy navigation of project files;

I'm quite happy with C-x C-f and completion, but there's dired and
speedbar.


> - out-of-the-box context-sensitive code-completion;

emacs has it.


> - one click (or keystroke) compilation, with dependencies management;

emacs has it.


> - one click (or keystroke) debugging, with dependencies management;

emacs has it.


> - other which I'm too lazy to mention.

emacs has them.


-- 
__Pascal Bourguignon__                     http://www.informatimago.com/
A bad day in () is better than a good day in {}.