On *nix systems, XEmacs looks much better and causes less eyestrain, because it can use outline fonts  (like pretty much every other modern application) which support hinting. 

Gnu Emacs can only use zaggy bitmap fonts. There is some effort to bring Gnu Emacs into the 21st century in this regard, but I don't know when it will succeed.

OTOH, I think that ESS works better under Gnu Emacs.

Yes, I'm annoyed that it's taking so long for gnu emacs to modernize!

David


Rodney Sparapani <rsparapa@mcw.edu> wrote: David Scott wrote:
>
> 
> Which is a question I have recently been considering.
> 
> I have used XEmacs for a few years. My usage is for R with ESS, TeX with 
> AUCTeX, sweave, .Rd files for my R package, a bit of mySQL and html.
> 
> Does either XEmacs or GNU Emacs have an edge these days? I have got the 
> impression the Emacs has advanced more than XEmacs recently.
> 
> Any opinions?
> 
> David Scott

This is a difficult question to answer.  ESS supports both and they are
roughly equivalent.  My personal opinion is that XEmacs is better on
Unix and Linux due to the wide variety of packages that are available as
a single download (sumo, but ESS is not one of them).  However, Emacs 
has certainly made some recent
improvements and I'd say it is already better on Mac OS X and Windows.
And, of course, why stop there.  There is also TeXmacs which is derived
from Emacs and SXEmacs from XEmacs.

Rodney

______________________________________________
ESS-help@stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/ess-help


	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]


