From: Juliusz Chroboczek Subject: Is Emacs One or Three? (was: vi rulez) Newsgroups: alt.religion.emacs Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 19:12:45 +0100 In-Reply-To: Per Abrahamsen's message of 12 Apr 1996 23:29:48 +0200 References: <4kdndb$sqm@news.uit.no> <4kjh3c$lcj@newslink.runet.edu> <4kk2hg$bb1@news.uit.no> Message-Id: The following message is a courtesy copy of an article that has been posted as well. Dear Fellow Preachers, In article , in response to an infidel, Per Abrahamsen wrote: PA> On the other hand, an argument can be made that Emacs *is* an os. PA> You can't get much closer to the os than that. Although I agree with you on the fundamental idea, I am afraid that this sentence diminishes The One Editor, and disposes of one of its fundamental mysteries; were we all not to know your usually perfect orthodoxy, cries of blasphemy would be heard. Emacs (let His name be honoured forever) is not only an OS; it is an OS *and* a programming language (The One Programming Language -- see alt.religion.lisp) *and* a set of editors, the programming language being the personnification of the link between the editors and the OS. Whether Emacs is One in Three or Three in One remains an open theological question. Let the benediction of Emacs always be upon your head, Juliusz Chroboczek P.S. There is no Editor but Emacs. Don't forget, however, that Unix is usually its prophet.