You seem to mistakenly believe that you are saying something different than what I said.You just re-iterated my point. Thanks!

You must have read the wrong article. The one linked to in the summary mentions Vsual Studio no less than 21 times, and always in a way that is positive. Show me a single insult. I couldn't find it.

I didn't pick up on it at first, but CTRL-Femacs and CRTL-Fvim both show no instances of either. Eclipse is mentioned, but M$ Visual Suck is mentioned in the same very small paragraph. How many times is M$ Visual Suck mentioned you ask? 21 times! Again, that M$ garbage 22 times, emacs and vim not once. Yep, it's an M$ ad.

"*Shrug!* I haven't done any programming since the Second Millennium ended."

Hey! Then guess what?! You are completely off topic and in the wrong story thread! If we ever need the opinion of a layperson with almost no skills on the subject and limited and outdated experience we will be sure to contact you immediately!

Don't be an idiot. I am a vim guy, but claiming that vim is better than emacs, or vice versa, is great for meme style joking around, but to say it in an actual serious discussion and mean it is a sign of shear stupidity.

Your thinking of IPEs (Integrated Programming Environments - which as far as I know don't exist) not Integrated Development Environments. IDEs are helpful for development, of which programming is merely a subset. Unfortunately the industry is flooded with people who don't know the difference:

How long have you been coding? 7 Days you say? When did you start the project? 7 Days ago? Seriously?

Yes, alas, there are a lot of people who think that development starts with writing code. It doesn't. If you are doing it that way, you are doing it wrong :-(

Linux must be a robot then, because I guarantee you that emacs and vim are both IDEs. Perhaps you didn't know that IDE stands for Integrated Development Environment? That is the only way you could arrive at such a ridiculously stupid conclusion that emacs is not an IDE.

Bullshit. vim is an equivalent tool to emacs (except it has a decent editor :-)

Saying emacs is by far the beat option available is stupid. It would be equally stupid to say the same about vim. Both vim and emacs are similar, and you would never get "laughed off this forum" for using vim rather than emacs. While we always joke about which is better, you'd have to be a moron to believe that emacs is far better than vim, or vice versa.

"PS, in concession: I could make the same cases for Vim and its grandchildren. Once you've learned them, if they do what you need then there's very little compelling reason to change."

Sound reasoning and pragmatism. Very nice. I use vim and joke about the vim vs. emacs debate all the time, but in truth I don't care which you are proficient with so long as it is with at least one of the two. If you can't use vim or emacs proficiently, I immediately start to question your competence. I'm not saying everyone who is unfamiliar with emacs or vim is incompetent, just that the likelihood rises quite a bit when the person can use neither well.

"I have been programming since vi was considered advanced."

We'll need more information to determine how long you have been programming, since you could have started moments before your post based on that criteria. VIM is still one of the best IDEs available (people mistakenly refer to it as an editor; that's like calling a car a windsheild; yes VIM has an editor, but it is much more than that.) Sure, you need to set it up with the right tools (e.g. tag files with cscope or ctags) but that is true of any modern IDE today (e.g. Eclipse)

Yes. Virtualization of complex computer networks with multiple virtual machines on a single desktop or laptop computer is so 1960s! Do yourself a favor. Until you actually understand the technology, refrain from commenting on it. You'll avoid the case where you broadcast your ignorance to the world.

It's more like using maximum desktop / laptop / handheld hardware and then let even more computations happen on much more massive systems.

Or you could, you know, make them all legal and have the better alternatives available. Most people will choose the safer alternative, but those who prefer to rot their teeth out can have at it! Why? Because, again, it is their life, not yours or mine. It really isn't all that complicated a concept, but people have bought into the bullshit idea that they have a right to decide what is OK or not OK for others. I'm not sure where that kind of self-important delusion comes from, but it is prevelant in modern US society :-(

"Wrong as rain, Zeke.

I can only assume your name is Zeke, and you are talking to yourself.

"An acquaintance of mine, who has a past relationship with smoking the meth and the cocaine, has given everything up except cigarettes and whiskey.

It seems like he gave all his Meth to you, because your post makes as much sense as a would your typical Meth-head right after they take a big blast.

Have a nice day Zeke!

I hope you weren't specifically writing to me in that post. That would be quite a bit like a kindergarten student trying to teach a college professor, frankly.

"That's a combination that makes for someone who will start to quickly drain their available cash resources to maintain their habit."

Again, you aren't grasping this concept. Legality, done right, will cause the cost to plummet. You'll have no more crime from the heroin user than you do the Alcoholic (less so actually, since they aren't piss drunk and literally out of their mindes)

"If there were drugs out there that have no dangerous side effects and are non addictive in reasonable quantities, then by all means, go for it, if you can enjoy it responsibly. "

This is apparently a difficult concept for you to grasp: "I don't need anyone telling me if I can "go for it" or not, nor are you qualified to do so.

In fact the whole mess is founded on the deluded belief that you have any say in the matter whatever. It is my personal freedom to make those decisions, and it is quite literally none of anyone else's business if I do, or do not, choose to leverage a chemical for the purposes of life augmentation, or even if I wish to do it for the exact opposite reason!