What is the easiest and most accessible editor?

[Linux for blind general discussion]

What does you right alt key do instead? When you press Right alt + x, what
happens?
Devin Prater
r.d.t.prater at gmail.com




On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 12:59 PM Linux for blind general discussion <
blinux-list at redhat.com> wrote:

> 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
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Blinux-list mailing list
> Blinux-list at redhat.com
> https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list