XEmacs 21.5.35 “kohlrabi” is released
xemacs.org
xemacs.org
> This release is the first beta release since 2013.
Ah, that explains it. XEmacs was my choice when getting into Usenet (for Gnus), because the character set and Windows support was much better than that of GNU Emacs.
I don't really miss XEmacs, but it's always cool when old programs still get some love.
It was kinda a big deal for me back then as I was working, IIRC, on DocBook documents which were validated using a Relax NG schema.
> I don't really miss XEmacs, but it's always cool when old programs still get some love.
I agree. But then I'm using Emacs daily. I'd miss XEmacs much more if I hadn't the opportunity to use Emacs! Still, as you sa, it's good to see XEmacs getting some love.
But wasn't there an issue where early nxml mode for Emacs would not support the Relax NG using the XML syntax? I vaguely remember the compact Relax NG syntax being supported but not the XML one. And for whatever reason that XML syntax for Relax NG was supported under XEmacs.
It was really a long time ago so my memory is very fussy but something like that. Since then I switched back to Emacs and I do use nxml-mode (I don't use Relax NG anymore though).
I will need to take a peek at Xemacs and I hope to see it move on to a release.
If surprised come in threes, I'd be hard-pressed what to nominate for the remaining two, especiall now that Duke Nukem ain't a meme anymore. A usable Hurd? A new WordStar? An expandable, consumer level desktop Mac? Perl with built-in OO?
I'd settle for zde17
A new wordstar would be so far from the original ideals that it'd be useless.
Asking seriously: why? I remember that maintaining XEmacs compatibility in some Emacs packages (I think it was AUCTeX, not sure) was an additional burden on the maintainers. Given that the userbase of XEmacs is probably very, very small, it would make sense to divert the efforts here towards GNU Emacs, no?
The only reason I can think of to think that it's good that XEmacs is still maintained is that one does not think FSF does TRT politically and/or technically. Is that your reason?
Back in 1995 it allowed me some confort on UNIX systems, away from Borland IDEs.
> This 32-bit count will overflow in 2038; but there will be no problem in that year, because by then all systems will have redefined time_t to be a 64-bit integer.
[x] doubt