What is the easiest and most accessible editor?

[Linux for blind general discussion]

Greetings!


I started out with Emacs back in 2005 or so, but until lately have used 
Vim exclusively.  I'm once again trying to learn Emacs, partly because 
of some of its extras and partly because I'm curious about how Emacspeak 
is to use.


In any event, maybe an Emacs user can tell me how to get the right alt 
key to work the same as the left one.  I expect that this would make it 
easier to use some of the key combinations.


Thanks for any help.


Al


On 11/30/21 13:43, Linux for blind general discussion wrote:
> In all fairness, a pair of scissors, probably the most common tool for
> cutting paper, kind of looks like the letter X, but honestly ctrl+x
> for cut and ctrl+v for paste most likely came about because ctrl+C is
> copy and x, c, and v are adjacent on qwerty keyboards and there's a
> certain sense to putting related functions together... Then again,
> even the mnemonic keystrokes probably only work as such in the
> language of the one who picked them and maybe a few closely related
> languages if you're lucky... and that we even call these functions cut
> and paste is arguably an artifact of a by gone era, similar to how
> often GUIs use floppy discs as the save icon or old-fashioned
> microphones for record icons.
>
> I will admit, I often find myself trying to use nano's key bindings
> when typing stuff in Firefox... and if I had the programming chops to
> write my own web browser, I'd probably have the Universal GUI
> keybindings as the default when editing text if I was going to release
> it, but would want to have the option to use nano keybindings if not
> just embed a nano "window" in the active text box.
>
> Though, on the subject of comparing emacs to a desktop environment...
> and perhaps it is more accurate to call emacs a TUI DE than a text
> editor, as a general rule, those applications another user mentions as
> things you'd expect a desktop environment to be bundled with are
> completely out of the way when not in use, can be ignored or removed
> if you don't use them, and can be replaced with other applications if
> you so choose. From the sounds of it, emacs is less a case of bundling
> an editor with other applications and the suite having a unified look
> and feel and more a case of mashing several applications together and
> if you just want a standalone editor, there's no way of uninstalling
> the other stuff, though admittedly, that's speaking from an outsider
> perspective.
>
> If nothing else, it sounds like emacs runs contrary to the "do one
> thing and do it well" and modularity aspects of the Unix philosophy.
>
> Though, to add another text-mode editor to the pile, there's also e3,
> who's two main advertised features are small size(Aptitude lists
> uncompressed size at 72K compared to nano's 2833k) and multiple
> executables that each duplicate the keybindings of a different text
> editor(including emacs, vi, pico, and nedit).
>
> _______________________________________________
> Blinux-list mailing list
> Blinux-list at redhat.com
> https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list
>