Emacs.FontBackend: xft
Emacs.font: DejaVu Sans Mono-11

./configure --prefix=/usr --enable-font-backend \
--with-xpm --with-jpeg --with-tiff --with-gif --with-png --with-freetype \
--with-xft --with-gtk
make bootstrap
cd lisp
make bootstrap-clean
make compile EMACS=../src/emacs
cd ..
make clean
make

Ruby is a language designed in the following steps:

* take a simple lisp language (like one prior to CL).
* remove macros, s-expression.
* add simple object system (much simpler than CLOS).
* add blocks, inspired by higher order functions.
* add methods found in Smalltalk.
* add functionality found in Perl (in OO way).

So, Ruby was a Lisp originally, in theory.
Let's call it MatzLisp from now on. ;-)

I invented the term object oriented, and I can tell you that C++ wasn't what I had in mind.

One of my most productive days was throwing away 1000 lines of code.

This practice is not only common, but institutionalized. For example, in the OO world you hear a good deal about "patterns". I wonder if these patterns are not sometimes evidence of case (c), the human compiler, at work. When I see patterns in my programs, I consider it a sign of trouble. The shape of a program should reflect only the problem it needs to solve. Any other regularity in the code is a sign, to me at least, that I'm using abstractions that aren't powerful enough - often that I'm generating by hand the expansions of some macro that I need to write.

(fset 'yes-or-no-p 'y-or-n-p)

(display-time)

M-x customize-variable <RET> display-time-24hr-format

(global-set-key [prior] 'cyclebuffer-forward)
(global-set-key [next] 'cyclebuffer-backward)

(setq inhibit-startup-message t)

(add-to-list 'backup-directory-alist
             (cons ".*" "~/.emacs.d/backup"))