XEmacs vs Emacs which is better for programming C++

Question

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

Hamadryad

Answer 1

Wikipedia description of differences between GNU Emacs and XEmacs.

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.

Ineludible

Answer 2

Steve Yegge makes some great points on why you should use GNU Emacs. Along with having a great article on using Emacs effectively. These days, I'd stay away from XEmacs unless you have a specific reason to use it.

Undersigned

Answer 3

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!

Ceratoid

+1 for "Choose the editor you like based on the task at hand--not on which one people say is no longer being developed!" – Kenyettakenyon

Answer 4

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.

Reichel

Answer 5

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

Karrykarst

Answer 6

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

Linsang

Answer 7

Emacs has long had GUI support on all platforms.

Other than just preference for look and feel, the only think I could think of is that I've heard there are some elisp compatibility issues between the two.

Edit: EmacsWiki has a EmacsAndXEmacs comparison article.

Tonita