The Origin of Emacs in 1976

The TECO version of EMACS is always a kick to look at, here is the dired code:<p><a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;pdp-10.trailing-edge.com&#x2F;mit_emacs_170_teco_1220&#x2F;01&#x2F;emacs&#x2F;new-dired.emacs.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;pdp-10.trailing-edge.com&#x2F;mit_emacs_170_teco_1220&#x2F;01&#x2F;e...</a><p>From this we can conclude that humans do not need any nice things like programming languages, assemblers or compilers to program effectively.

About this:<p><pre><code> To: CBF at MIT-AI, EAK at MIT-AI, ED at MIT-AI, MOON ay MIT-AI </code></pre> Does anyone know if this is literally how they wrote email addresses in 1976? Instead of using the @ symbol they typed the word &quot;at&quot;?<p>I realize this was before DNS was invented, so I am not surprised by the lack of TLD.

On FreeBSD &#x2F;usr&#x2F;ports&#x2F;editors&#x2F;teco still works if you want to try your name and $ to see what awesome edit happens (my name starting with g I think means its g(lobally) applied)<p>Interesting to see &#x27;76 email formats had To: and CC: but not Subject: and Date: info was rolled into what now we might call the Envelope, projected into the header.<p>I used EMAS and Vax&#x2F;VMS based email in &#x27;79 which was sufficiently second-system to have a standard to implement against and Type:Value was in, with Date: and Subject:

I&#x27;m nearly 60 years old. I used emacs in school and I still use it every day today. Along with the unix shells and utility commands, I can&#x27;t think of any other software I&#x27;ve consistenty used for all those years. They really did it right with that stuff.<p>Back in those days, csh was more popular as an interactive shell. sh was used more for scripting. At least that&#x27;s what I recall. bash didn&#x27;t exist yet.

I had always thought James Gosling helped create Emacs with Guy

Is there any point in learning emacs in 2024?<p>I know vi&#x2F;vim pretty well, but I&#x27;ve never bothered with emacs much since the multi key stroke navigation just seems so unergonomic to me.

would it be a bad idea to rewrite the emacsLisp interpreter and other OS parts in a multi-core friendly language like preferably GO but rust would work too?<p>my reasoning is that it would add another 100 years to the shelf life of emacs. its good enough i dont have any reason to switch, but if the single threaded perf i s still a bottleneck in 5 years i&#x27;d probably switch to ZED.