Post 9nf0sp3s6J0vsMdIP2 by Janus@x0r.be
(DIR) More posts by Janus@x0r.be
(DIR) Post #9naKZvcgufbL6rezzs by ParadeGrotesque@mastodon.sdf.org
2019-10-04T14:43:58Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
I'd love to use emacs as my editor.But, no Markdown syntax colors enabled by default? I mean, seriously? Vim opens and syntax colors any file I have thrown at it automatically.The more I try to use emacs, the more I realize how powerful vi/vim way of doing things is and how much more productive it makes me than the endless Ctrl- Alt- of emacs.In a bizarre way, vi basic movements and operations feel better put together. And don't get me started on the whole tab / buffer / window thing.
(DIR) Post #9naLPK5DjLUHjxVlnE by ParadeGrotesque@mastodon.sdf.org
2019-10-04T14:50:14Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
The conclusion is that the default vi configuration is enough to make me productive, while emacs configuration is a dark art ("I have finally setup emacs!" sounds like a cry for help).Of course, this required me to learn all of vi keystokes, which is a pretty steep price to pay. But one that still pays dividends years later.And yes, I know about spacemacs and vile, and doom emacs, and a bunch of others. They still feel slow and sluggish, and neither fully vi nor "productive" emacs enough.
(DIR) Post #9naLWgUUokeXGOqOUy by W10x12_UNO@mastodon.sdf.org
2019-10-04T14:49:09Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ParadeGrotesque Dislike
(DIR) Post #9naMLxamzhap4VEoAC by W10x12_UNO@mastodon.sdf.org
2019-10-04T15:05:11Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ParadeGrotesque I think what you've shown here is that emacs really isn't a text editor, fundamentally. If all you want to do is edit text, emacs is a poor choice. However, if you're into lisp and want to play around with a customizable lisp engine with insane support for all kinds of crazy things, then editing text in emacs is a joy.My counter point to your argument is this: both emacs and vi have a steep learning curve. Why put in the effort if all you get is the ability to edit text?
(DIR) Post #9naMvlo0ILFSwMUhyS by matera@mastodon.sdf.org
2019-10-04T15:11:20Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ParadeGrotesque lol my excuse for not using emacs is, "I already have an operating system"
(DIR) Post #9naPtLRtcIY8TpgljU by ParadeGrotesque@mastodon.sdf.org
2019-10-04T15:40:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@W10x12_UNO It's OK, I still like you!AND IT IS THE TRUTH ANYWAY!*shakes fist at emacs*
(DIR) Post #9naaqzcqsoyXiGtW1w by ParadeGrotesque@mastodon.sdf.org
2019-10-04T17:47:06Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@W10x12_UNO I get your point. I even agree with it, which is why I keep coming back to emacs.Mine was more: - the default configuration of emacs seems less productive than vi's.- the default keystroke of vi, once you understand them, seem more intuitive than emacs.For instance, once you know that 'd' is delete, the rest is logical (dd, dw, D, etc are all delete operations)
(DIR) Post #9naazJEDstsApJL8HQ by ParadeGrotesque@mastodon.sdf.org
2019-10-04T17:47:35Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@matera And it already has a great text editor, right? 😋
(DIR) Post #9naxxp86xSgq2ljTwu by matera@mastodon.sdf.org
2019-10-04T22:06:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ParadeGrotesque Sweetest little thing ever, syntax highlighting and all 😉
(DIR) Post #9nf0soibNO04oOgJFY by starbreaker@mastodon.sdf.org
2019-10-04T15:33:57Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@W10x12_UNO @ParadeGrotesque As somebody who uses both #emacs and #vi, I can't deny that Emacs is mainly a LISP virtual machine disguised as a text editor. Even by default it's pretty good for COMPOSING new text.But if you want to do precision EDITING of existing text, vi is better. I won't deny it. I'd never edit a system config file living in /etc using Emacs. A modal editor like vi is better for the job because it forces me to slow down and think carefully about what I'm doing.
(DIR) Post #9nf0sp3s6J0vsMdIP2 by Janus@x0r.be
2019-10-06T20:40:51Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@starbreaker @W10x12_UNO @ParadeGrotesque But you can have modal text editing in Emacs. Surely you agree that the software foundation is important. Emacs has more mature packages. The model editing is almost a trivial addition compared to more complicated things like Language Server Protocol integration.
(DIR) Post #9nf0spJTAJUUejvkiO by ParadeGrotesque@mastodon.sdf.org
2019-10-06T20:58:27Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Janus Everything that you say is true. However, it does not help me use emacs for my daily driver.Vim is also mature (perhaps too mature, as there are efforts right now to replace it). And, as I have said before, its default configuration suits me a lot better.@starbreaker @W10x12_UNO
(DIR) Post #9ngjUx4wxyg4PtXsrA by starbreaker@mastodon.sdf.org
2019-10-07T14:59:12Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Janus Sure, there's stuff like Evil Mode and Viper. However, they're not really an adequate substitute for actually using vi/vim/neovim if you prefer vi-style editors or are in a situation where vi is the best tool for the job.@W10x12_UNO @ParadeGrotesque
(DIR) Post #9ngjUxUpPlNTi9eYC0 by ParadeGrotesque@mastodon.sdf.org
2019-10-07T16:53:06Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@starbreaker That's my experience as well: evil and viper are not good enought, and they are certainly not fast enough.One huge advantage of vim is that it's as fast as I am. Even on large files, complex operations are near instantaneous.Evil is just plain... slow. And incomplete.@Janus @W10x12_UNO
(DIR) Post #9ngjlseKghHHbPAS92 by starbreaker@mastodon.sdf.org
2019-10-07T16:56:09Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ParadeGrotesque You know I'm an Emacs fan, but I use it because it works for me. However, there are situations where a vi-style editor is the right tool for the job.And if using vim for everything works for you, that's *also* fine. Vim is also a good, solid editor and I used it for years before getting into Emacs.There's no need for a hard sell or a holy war -- even if it's "against" VS Code users. Emacs and vim will still be around when others want it.@Janus @W10x12_UNO