Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!bu.edu!att!cbfsb!cbnewsc!lgm
From: lgm@cbnewsc.att.com (lawrence.g.mayka)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ti.explorer
Subject: Re: X11M (Monochrome X11 server) - Do people still use Explorers?
Summary: Comments from someone moving in the other direction
Message-ID: <1990Nov29.002955.8141@cbnewsc.att.com>
Date: 29 Nov 90 00:29:55 GMT
References: <47877@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU> <9011280928.AA06943@mizar.DoCS.UU.SE>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 32

In article <9011280928.AA06943@mizar.DoCS.UU.SE>, Bjorn.Victor@docs.uu.se (Bjorn Victor) writes:
> I agree, mostly.  I still haven't seen a lisp-mode for Emacs that
> beats the Explorer environment, though, but some would say that I
> haven't seen Harlequin.

Harlequin indeed has the best programming environment I've seen on a
conventional processor, though I certainly wouldn't trade my Symbolics
for it.

>   >Maybe some of the reasons mentioned above are not quite that compelling if one
>   >considers a Mac+Explorer board (or Sun+Explorer board if it exists)
>   >configuration, but I don't think this is the right way to go.
> 
> I agree that this is not the Right Way.  

I myself think a coprocessor solution is quite reasonable for someone
who feels a need for both environments.  The people I know who are
getting Symbolics UX boards for their beloved Suns apparently agree.

> anything else than a Lisp environment.  On the other hand, I guess
> that not many of us are plain Lisp hackers anymore, but need and use
> more and more of the good tools that have/are emerging in the UNIX
> environment.

And then, others of us are moving in the opposite direction.


	Lawrence G. Mayka
	AT&T Bell Laboratories
	lgm@iexist.att.com

Standard disclaimer.