blocks|key|5249038|text|Wikipedia+description+of+differences+between+GNU+Emacs+and+XEmacs。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|offset|length|data|5249039|在我看来，在GNU+Emacs21发布之后，XEmacs的开发在几年前就开始停滞不前了。目前，大多数elisp包都是为GNU+Emacs编写的，不能保证它们能在XEmacs中工作。|5249040|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xemacs#XEmacs_and_GNU_Emacs^0|0|1T|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|N|8|@]|9|@$A|O|B|P|1|Q]]|C|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|R|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]|$1|F|3|-4|5|6|7|S|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]]|G|$H|$5|I|J|K|C|$L|M]]]]

<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xemacs#XEmacs_and_GNU_Emacs" rel="noreferrer">Wikipedia description of differences between GNU Emacs and XEmacs</a>.

In my opinion, XEmacs development started to stagnate several years ago, after release of GNU Emacs 21. Most elisp packages are written for GNU Emacs nowadays and they aren't guaranteed to work in the XEmacs.

blocks|key|274907|text|关于为什么应该使用GNU+Emacs，Steve+Yegge提出了一些很好的观点。同时还有一篇关于使用Emacs+effectively的很棒的文章。这些天来，除非你有特别的理由使用XEmacs，否则我会远离它。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|offset|length|data|274908|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2008/04/xemacs-is-dead-long-live-xemacs.html|1|http://steve.yegge.googlepages.com/effective-emacs^0|J|B|0|1L|B|1|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|N|8|@]|9|@$A|O|B|P|1|Q]|$A|R|B|S|1|T]]|C|$]]|$1|D|3|-4|5|6|7|U|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]]|E|$F|$5|G|H|I|C|$J|K]]|L|$5|G|H|I|C|$J|M]]]]

<a href="http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2008/04/xemacs-is-dead-long-live-xemacs.html" rel="noreferrer">Steve Yegge</a> makes some great points on why you should use GNU Emacs. Along with having a great article on using Emacs <a href="http://steve.yegge.googlepages.com/effective-emacs" rel="noreferrer">effectively</a>. These days, I'd stay away from XEmacs unless you have a specific reason to use it.

blocks|key|274958|text|哪个编辑器更适合编写C%2B%2B代码这个问题的答案是，对于该功能，实际上没有区别。一个有什么，另一个有相似的功能。你可以挑选一个你喜欢的。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|274959|它们之间存在差异，对于某些任务，一种可能比另一种更好。例如，Mule，多语言文件的XEmacs实现；XEmacs做对了，Emacs在某些方面仍然有问题。这取决于任务。每个人在某些任务上都做得更好，对于许多任务来说，没有实际的区别。|274960|至于没有积极开发的XEmacs+--我和儿子在去年写了一个lisp程序来实现图标主题。我们还编写了一个缓冲区颜色程序，以便在不同的缓冲区中轻松地更改颜色，包括基于规则的颜色和任意选择的颜色。这两个包在Emacs中的存在方式都不同。我们还重写了xpm-mode，将其从400行代码减少到2000行代码，添加了对alpha层、渐变填充的支持，改进了显示，添加了更多工具(鼠标光标工具，如画笔)和一个新的图标栏来运行所有内容，等等……就在去年夏天。用于制作和编辑图标(以及其他类型的xpm)的更好的工具。Emacs还没有这个功能，不过他们肯定可以移植过来。|274961|我只是说，XEmacs的开发已经慢了很多，但它仍在开发中。|274962|根据手头的任务选择您喜欢的编辑器--而不是人们说不再开发的编辑器！|274963|entityMap^0|0|0|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|L|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|M|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|N|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|F|3|G|5|6|7|O|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|H|3|I|5|6|7|P|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|J|3|-4|5|6|7|Q|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|K|$]]

The answer to the question of which editor is better for writing C++ code is that for that functionality, there is practically no difference. What one has, the other has similar functions. You pick and choose the one you like.

There are differences between them, and for certain tasks one might be better better than the other. For example, Mule, the XEmacs implementation for multilingual files; XEmacs got it right, and Emacs still has trouble with some aspects of that. It depends on the task. Each is better at some tasks, and for many tasks, there is no practical difference. 

As far as XEmacs not being actively developed--My son and I wrote a lisp program to implement icon themes in the last year. We also wrote a buffer-colors program to make it easy to change colors in different buffers, both rule-based, and arbitrarily chosen colors.
Neither of those packages exist in Emacs the same way. We also rewrote the xpm-mode, taking it from 400 lines to over 2000 lines of code, adding support for alpha layers, gradient fills, improved the display, added more tools (mouse cursor tools, like a paintbrush) and a new icon bar to run everything from and more... just last summer. Much better tool for making and editing icons (and other types of xpm's). Emacs doesn't have that yet, though they certainly could port it over. 

I'm just saying, XEmacs development has slowed down a lot, but it is still being developed. 

Choose the editor you like based on the task at hand--not on which one people say is no longer being developed!

blocks|key|3137012|text|对于C%2B%2B开发来说，我没有太多的选择，因为基本的工具都适用于这两个工具。这些天，它们在GNU+Emacs中的工作可能会稍微好一些，因为我的印象是，现在很少有人同时针对这两个目标。两者都有一个GUI，但根据我的经验，最好在一段时间后关闭它的一部分。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|3137013|我一直是一个长期的XEmacs用户，直到大约两年前，事情变得很明显，与GNU+Emacs开发相比，XEmacs开发似乎落后了很多-过去是相反的。我毫不费力地进行了切换，从那以后我一直在使用各种GNU+Emacsen。另外，你会发现很多最近移植到其他平台的Emacs，比如Carbon+Emacs，Aquamacs或者EmacsW32都是基于GNU+Emacs的。|3137014|entityMap^0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|F|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|G|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|-4|5|6|7|H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|E|$]]

IMHO there isn't that much to chose between them for C++ development as the basic tools work for both. They're probably working slightly better in GNU Emacs these days as I get the impression that fewer people are targeting both these days. Both have a GUI, but in my experience you're better off switching off parts of it after a short while.

I've been a long-time XEmacs user until about two years ago when it became clear that compared to GNU Emacs development, XEmacs development seems to be lagging behind considerably- used to be the other way around. I managed to switch without too much effort and have been using various GNU Emacsen ever since. Also, you'll find that a lot of the recent ports of Emacs to other platforms like Carbon Emacs, Aquamacs or EmacsW32 are all based on GNU Emacs.

blocks|key|274926|text|与XEmacs相比，目前使用GNU+Emacs更好，因为它现在有更多的功能。而Cedet目前在GNU+Emacs上工作得更好|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|274927|entityMap^0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|D|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|-4|5|6|7|E|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|C|$]]

Currently is better to use GNU Emacs, as it has more features now, comparing with XEmacs. And Cedet currently better works on GNU Emacs

blocks|key|2183259|text|Xemacs没有在积极开发中，因此emacs是emacs实现的唯一选择。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|2183260|entityMap^0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|D|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|-4|5|6|7|E|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|C|$]]

Xemacs is not under active development, so emacs is the only choice of emacs implementations.

which is better editor for C++ programming XEmacs or Emacs?

XEmacs vs Emacs which is better for programming C++

翻译质量差，导致语言生硬或混乱。

没有提供实际的解决方法或示例。

解答不清晰，无法理解或解决问题。

页面排版不美观，阅读体验差。

文章

问答

视频

教程

学习中心

腾讯云实验室

直播

竞赛

腾讯云代码分析专区

腾讯iOA零信任安全管理系统专区

腾讯云架构师技术同盟交流圈

腾讯云数据库专区

腾讯云智能顾问专区

腾讯云原生专区

腾讯混元专区

腾讯云TCE专区

腾讯云Lighthouse专区

腾讯云HAI专区

腾讯云Edgeone专区

腾讯云存储专区

腾讯云智能专区

腾讯轻联专区 

腾讯云开发专区

TAPD专区

腾讯轻量云游戏服专区

腾讯云最具价值专家

腾讯云架构师技术同盟

腾讯云创作之星

腾讯云开发者先锋

腾讯云AI代码助手

云原生构建

TAPD 敏捷项目管理

Cloud Studio

SDK中心

API中心

命令行工具

功能1上新10个字符

功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符。

功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符。

功能5描述100个字符功能5描述100个字符功能5描述100个字符功能5描述100个字符功能5描述100个字符功能5描述100个字符

功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符

功能4上新

文章&问答评论现已支持表情

全新交互，全新视觉，新增快捷键、悬浮工具栏、高亮块等功能并同时优化现有功能，全面提升创作效率和体验

社区富文本编辑器全新改版！诚邀体验～ 

精选全网热门MCP server，让你的AI更好用 🚀

💥开发者 MCP广场重磅上线！

涵盖代码开发、场景应用、自动测试全流程，助你从零构建专属AI助手

一站式MCP教程库，解锁AI应用新玩法

聚焦“写作效率、视觉美观与运行性能”三方面进行全面升级，为您提供更高效、稳定的创作环境

社区富文本&Markdown编辑器全新改版上线，欢迎大家体验!

诚挚邀请您参与本次调研，分享您的真实使用感受与建议。您的反馈至关重要，感谢您的支持与参与！

社区新版编辑器体验调研

哪个编辑器更适合C++编程XEmacs或Emacs？

问XEmacs与Emacs哪个更适合C++编程
EN

回答 6

Stack Overflow用户

Stack Overflow用户

Stack Overflow用户

社区

活动

圈层

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问XEmacs与Emacs哪个更适合C++编程EN

回答 6

Stack Overflow用户

Stack Overflow用户

Stack Overflow用户

社区

活动

圈层

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问XEmacs与Emacs哪个更适合C++编程
EN