Re: A guide on setting up C/C++ development environment for Emacs

[Jai Dayal]

No, my interpretation is correct.

If someone writes a manual on how to fix a Ford V8 engine, the discussion
on the engine's fuel efficiency and safety is completely irrelevant.
Following your logic, one could then turn the discussion into the utility
of driving in general, since it may otherwise lead to more disappointed
people.

His manual is about how to setup CEDET and use it. It's not about how to
evaluate CEDET in terms of productivity.

>And no, it is not necessary to mention the bad ergonomics of Emacs'
keybindings whenever someone asks about how to configure Gnus for
reading e-mail.

Why not? You just said that failing to mention the shortcomings can lead to
more disappointed people around. Following this "logic" failure to mention
Emacs' shortcomings during any discussion on Emacs features will lead to
more disappointed people around.


On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 4:06 PM, Óscar Fuentes <ofv@wanadoo.es> wrote:

> Jai Dayal <dayalsoap@gmail.com> writes:
>
> >>I'll assume
> > that the directions given on the guide will make me more productive
> > while working on X.
> >
> > Sure, however, if X is inherently broken, that's a completely unrelated
> > discussion. The author of the manual here isn't even involved in CEDET.
> >
> >>Giving a heads-up is appropiate here.
> >
> > Then giving a heads-up in regards to Emacs is completely valid, and all
> > discussion, in this thread, on Emacs' short-comings are completely valid
> as
> > well? That's horrible logic.
>
> Your interpretation of my words is terrible ;-) If someone gives advice
> about using X, when X has serious shortcommings for the intended
> purpose, discussing those shortcommings is quite relevant. If X is
> mostly appropiate save for some minor details, mentioning those is just
> a nice service for the user.
>
> And no, it is not necessary to mention the bad ergonomics of Emacs'
> keybindings whenever someone asks about how to configure Gnus for
> reading e-mail.
>
>
>
>