From: Hubert Figuiere (email@example.com)
Date: Wed Jan 22 2003 - 06:03:36 EST
----- Forwarded message from firstname.lastname@example.org -----
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 17:41:01 -0800
From: "Robert G. Werner" <email@example.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.2) Gecko/20021202
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
To: Omer Zak <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: abiword-dev <email@example.com>
Subject: Re: Code patches vs. macros vs. plugins (was: Re: Re: INS)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Omer Zak wrote:
> Not exactly. My suggestion is to take this one feature from EMACS.
> For the OS stuff we'll use other mechanisms (such as plugins, already
> supported by AbiWord).
Please don't feel that I was hostile to your idea. I just saw Emacs,
Guile, and Scheme, and saw a perfect (IMHO) opertunity to be a
smart-ass. My only real objection to programing my Word Processor is
embedding macros in the documents and thus opening up the possiblity
of Macro Viruses like MS did in the mid ninetys. Other than that, I
can surely see some important uses for it, especiallly in the area of
So keep on thinking.
-- Robert G. Werner firstname.lastname@example.org 2001/9/11
I'd rather push my Harley than ride a rice burner.
----- End forwarded message -----
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Jan 22 2003 - 06:04:15 EST