[HN Gopher] Emacs 27.2
___________________________________________________________________
Emacs 27.2
Author : lelf
Score : 225 points
Date : 2021-03-25 12:58 UTC (10 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (lists.gnu.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (lists.gnu.org)
| hamburga wrote:
| In case you're eager to upgrade (I never am, that's the point
| with Emacs![1]) here's the description of the changes:
|
| "Emacs 27.2 is a bug-fix release, with no new features with
| respect toEmacs 27.1."
|
| [1] Excellent Steve Yegge post describing how much Emacs cares
| about stability and backwards-compatibility: https://steve-
| yegge.medium.com/dear-google-cloud-your-deprec...
| sigmonsays wrote:
| what is the release cadence of emacs?
| ddavis wrote:
| While a set-in-stone release schedule doesn't exist, there is
| _a lot_ of development activity (emacs-devel is a very busy
| mailing list). 99.9% of the time it's safe to use the bleeding
| edge head of the repository if you want to use the latest
| stuff.
| disgruntledphd2 wrote:
| except in the few months following a major release (at least
| for me)
| nathell wrote:
| I think there isn't an official one, but since 2016 there's
| been a major version released approximately every two years,
| and a minor version every couple of months.
|
| https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/history.html
| unixhero wrote:
| That's pretty solid!
| ilovecaching wrote:
| Not to start a holy war, but what are the advantages of emacs
| over vim these days? I'm considering switching to emacs just to
| have learned both.
| ducharmdev wrote:
| You can have the best of both worlds using spacemacs in evil
| mode. Essentially gives you emacs with a lot of community-
| selected plugins, but with vim keybindings.
|
| As a vim user, there's just certain tools emacs provides to
| which there's no vim equivalent (or the vim implementation is
| lacking). Like org mode for example: I've yet to come across
| something outside of the emacs ecosystem that does a good job
| of replicating org mode. Maybe jupyter notebooks come close in
| some ways, but AFAIK the org mode experience is fairly unique
| to emacs.
| elpatoisthebest wrote:
| Take my answer with a grain of salt because I have much more
| experience with vim and I have used emacs only off and on for a
| couple years, and I only use it as an "IDE" of sorts.
|
| So, how I experience them, they aren't exactly competitors in a
| direct sense.
|
| When I use vim in the terminal, I treat my workflow in a
| particular way. I use tmux to have windows for multiple
| projects (usually I run 2 or more microservices in my day to
| day). I use TUIs like lazygit, and I rely heavily on command
| line tools to build, compile, and do most of the daily things.
| I am familiar with those and it's basically like the whole
| terminal is my IDE in some ways. For note taking and idea
| management, I use vimwiki within vim.
|
| Using Emacs is different for everyone's specific use cases, but
| the way I have tried to use it as an IDE for golang, node, and
| some react. Emacs seems to prefer integrating your workflow
| INTO emacs rather than just having emacs be a single part of
| your workflow. (I'm simplifying too much, I think)
|
| Evil mode gives me literally every single vim command I ever
| have used in my entire life. I am a heavy vim user, but I am
| not an extreme power user. I use macros, regex, and other
| simple vim stuff. All of it is perfectly fine in evil mode as I
| use it. But feature parity isn't a great reason to switch from
| vim IMO.
|
| -The first thing that really is a huge improvement is org mode
| to capture anything in the code I am looking at that I don't
| have time to address. Like capturing a weird piece of code or
| something that might have a bug state, org capture, make a note
| of it and I can come right back to it later when I have free
| time.
|
| - Everyone touts magit. I love magit, BUT if I'm being honest
| with myself, lazygit is nearly just as good...and if you've
| been using git commands fine for any amount of time, it's more
| of a nicety than a MUST have. I don't view magit as "the killer
| app" that other do, but I admit that I really like it and use
| it heavily whenever I use emacs.
|
| - Elisp is amazing compared to vimscript. That's pretty much
| that whole bullet point.
|
| There are more things, but it might depend on your personal
| workflow and the kind of work you do.
|
| I recommend dipping your toes in using DOOM emacs (or
| spacemacs, but I didn't like that one as much) and getting a
| feel for emacs. You might find that you like it, you might find
| that you prefer your current vim & terminal based workflow
| better.
|
| I'm somewhere between the worlds. I really keep coming back to
| emacs because of 1) Org mode 2) Csv mode (Sounds silly, but I
| do a LOT of csv parsing in my life) 3) elisp hacking & scratch
| mode.
| znpy wrote:
| The scripting language isn't total crap, for starters.
|
| There's a huge amount of tools (package) that enable additional
| features.
|
| It's easy to interface with other stuff.
| neolog wrote:
| In some sense, they're not in the same category. The old joke
| "Emacs is a great operating system, it just needs a good text
| editor" is basically true.
|
| If you like vim, try Doom Emacs or Spacemacs.
|
| If I were going for pure text editing today I might want
| something like https://kakoune.org/ whose selection->action
| pattern seems better than Vim's action->selection pattern.
| okamiueru wrote:
| I'm a little confused. If doom emacs is good, wouldn't the
| emacs experience when just disabling evil (vi-bindings), and
| thus having regular emacs workflow not also be pretty good?
| neolog wrote:
| Spacemacs has like four different keybinding modes, one of
| them is regular emacs mode. I thought it was pretty good. I
| haven't used doom myself but I know people like it.
| klibertp wrote:
| NOTE: This is advice for programmers: if you're not a coder, it
| won't make any sense for you.
|
| If you are a programmer, though, and you're going to learn
| Emacs, learn it along with Emacs Lisp and Elisp development
| tools.
|
| One definite advantage of doing that is experiencing the
| "plugin" development environment done right. If you ever
| scripted Vim, or any other program other than the web browser,
| you're in for a fun ride. really The "plugins" in Emacs are,
| surprisingly, full-blown programs. When writing them, you can
| evaluate any part of the code and see the results immediately.
| You have access to a source-level debugger and two profilers
| out of the box. Every function you use is documented, and
| accessing that documentation is trivial. You can "go to
| definition" of any variable and function, including primitives
| written in C (if you compiled Emacs yourself and have the
| sources on disk). You can modify, extend, or override any
| function anywhere with advices. The language itself is also
| interesting: it's multi-paradigm. You can write code in
| procedural, functional, and OOP styles. The OOP implementation
| is based on generic functions and multimethods/multiple
| dispatch - unless you worked with Clojure or Julia, you're
| unlikely to have encountered that before. The quote/unquote-
| based macros are powerful, and even if you don't use them, you
| can benefit from them, for example, by using a library
| providing pattern-matching/destructuring (like pcase or -let).
|
| And you get all of that _just for writing plugins for an
| editor_. Let that sink in. The tooling and language, which,
| though a bit clunky sometimes, rivals professional IDEs and
| languages like Kotlin, _just for writing extensions_. Seeing
| all of this after trying - and failing - to write a simple Vim
| plugin with VimL and Lua was a mind-blowing experience.
|
| It's also an advantage - to get back to your question - which
| explains the massive amount of Elisp programs and plugins out
| there. Well worth experiencing.
| selectnull wrote:
| I can so recommend this.
|
| I've switched to emacs few years ago for the same reason and
| spent about a year using it. Although I've switched back to vim
| afterwards, having spent time with emacs was fun and not a
| waste of time.
|
| Have a leap of faith, find the advantages of one (or the other)
| for yourself. If you don't like at any time for any reason just
| switch back: after all, it all text files you're editing.
| in9 wrote:
| as a vim user, how could I learn Emacs? I know of Evil mode, but
| how easy is it to have some stuff just like I have in vim (such
| as custom text objects, vim-surround, etc..).
| acoard wrote:
| Look at Doom Emacs. It's pre-configured to work out of the box
| for modern dev.
|
| There are also some good guides on YouTube by DistroTube, if
| you prefer to learn that way.
|
| https://github.com/hlissner/doom-emacs
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dr_iBj91eeI
| kragen wrote:
| https://github.com/emacs-mirror/emacs/blob/master/etc/NEWS.2...
| says, "This is a bug-fix release with no new features." But I
| don't understand what the bugs were.
| nicklecompte wrote:
| Check the Changelog for that:
| https://raw.githubusercontent.com/emacs-mirror/emacs/master/...
| kragen wrote:
| Thanks!
| b5n wrote:
| From the OP:
|
| > For the complete list of changes and the people who made
| them, see the various ChangeLog files in the source
| distribution.
| Decabytes wrote:
| I've used Emacs for almost 5 years now and it has served me well.
| In the beginning it was frustrating and confusing, but now that I
| understand it, it's the way I naturally interact with code on my
| computer. The fact that so many gnu tools have movement similar
| to Emacs means that I can quickly become more effective in them.
| The fact that my work Macbook allows me to do some rudimentary
| movement with C-a, C-e, C-f, C-n brings me joy.
|
| Emacs rewards me for learning it better, and when I think about
| what it does, and is capable of doing, I'm just in awe. I highly
| recommend reading Mastering Emacs if you would like to become a
| more effective Emacs user.
|
| After using it for years I can say my single biggest gripe with
| Emacs is its performance. Elisp is powerful but slow, and has
| many warts. The developments with GccEmacs excites me, and there
| is still GuileMacs. As a more experienced user Emacs frustrates
| me because at times I demand too much of it. And when that
| happens, I try to temper that frustration with the understanding
| that the program is 36 years and 5 days old to the day, and has
| outlived many other pieces of software. Computers looked
| different in 85 than they did today, and the fact that I have
| saved truly days of programming time due how effective it makes
| me cannot be overlooked.
|
| I want Emacs to continue to improve. I want it to get even better
| than it already is, but I am so grateful for the people who have
| made it what it is today.
| anaerobicover wrote:
| On the performance/stability of Elisp front, I just heard about
| remacs, which is a fork that's starting by porting all the C to
| Rust: https://github.com/remacs/remacs
|
| Still in early stages, but I think that's one to keep an eye
| on.
| foobarbaz33 wrote:
| The rust re-write is not intended to bring performance
| benefits. Currently the Rust version is a massive downgrade
| in performance relative to the C nativecomp branch.
| jsilence wrote:
| Most recent change is 7 months ago. I would not hold my
| breath.
| [deleted]
| tsimionescu wrote:
| I'd be much more interested in one of the CL rewrites, which
| could (1) run all of the elisp as efficient compiled Common
| Lisp, and (2) extend the customizability ot the deepest
| layers of Emacs.
|
| Unfortunately, most seem to be relatively dead from what I've
| seen.
| tharne wrote:
| I prefer vim as an editor, but in terms of being a unique and
| fascinating piece of software, emacs wins hands down. There's
| something really cool about the fact that you can't easily
| answer the question, "What is emacs similar to?", because it's
| such a total sui generis.
| luismbo wrote:
| It's similar to a Lisp Machine.
| agumonkey wrote:
| Based on a few old mailing list it's apparently only very
| slightly so, and i'm not dissing emacs, it's just that the
| people who made lisp os and it's graphical layer really did
| allow users to augment and interact with most of the system
| in a very fluid and capable manner. Some examples from that
| mailing list (thread from the 90s or maybe even 80s) were
| still not present on a daily basis for code edition /
| versionning in the 2000s. Makes you wonder
| prewett wrote:
| Viper mode could give you the best of both worlds, depending
| on what you like about vim. If it's the key navigation, viper
| has you covered.
| NyxWulf wrote:
| spacemacs has a very complete vim layer. By far it's the
| most complete implementation outside of actual vim I've
| seen.
| Keyframe wrote:
| I used emacs quite a lot, back in the day, and have
| switched to vim for now.. well, too long. Thing with vim
| is that I've never seen anyone using stock vim and keys,
| there's this whole layer of plugins and custom key
| bindings that make it so effective for any particular
| user. Would that translate to spacemacs at all? I've only
| glanced at it, but not sure if it supports Vim plug for
| example.
| jeremyjh wrote:
| Stock Spacemacs is like a fully-tricked out Vim
| configuration, made by and for "plugin" junkies. Its
| leader-based keybindings are very well thought-out and
| discoverable since you get a small menu for the level you
| are at. For example <space> g gets you to the git
| submenu, if you forget that <space> g s gets you magit-
| status it will remind you there.
| tharne wrote:
| > Stock Spacemacs is like a fully-tricked out Vim
| configuration, made by and for "plugin" junkies.
|
| That is a fantastic description of Spacemacs
| j4yav wrote:
| Sincere question: if I already have a vim setup with all
| the plugins I like, and I switch to evil mode so
| everything more or less works as I had it, what does
| emacs open the door to that I couldn't do before? Org
| mode I imagine is one piece. Is there anything else I
| should look at if I try it?
| mapolone wrote:
| There are a few IMHO: magit [1] is a nice piece for Git.
| And there's vterm, if you wish to use a (usable) term or
| tmux/screen without leaving the editor, tramp mode [2]
| for remote files and last but not least ergoemacs [3] if
| you prefer the CUA style for generic commands (and reduce
| RSI). Oh, and forgot to mention helm [4] too...
|
| [1] https://magit.vc
|
| [2] https://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/TrampMode
|
| [3] https://ergoemacs.github.io/
|
| [4] https://github.com/emacs-helm/helm
| acoard wrote:
| Spacemacs is indeed great, I used it myself recently. But
| I will say, it's no longer really actively maintained.
| The community has migrated over to ~~Spacemacs~ Dooom
| Emacs, which is very similar (still uses space as leader
| key and vim bindings everywhere). In my experience, Doom
| Emacs runs a lot faster too.
|
| https://github.com/hlissner/doom-emacs
|
| edit: Changeed Spacemacs to Doom Emacs, whoops.
| comfydragon wrote:
| > The community has migrated over to Spacemacs
|
| I'm guessing you meant to say Doom Emacs there?
| acoard wrote:
| I did! Thank you for the correction. Editted.
| dfinninger wrote:
| Spacemacs uses "Evil mode"[1], which is available just as
| a regular (MELPA) package. I started with Vim and so I've
| always used evil. "Vanilla" emacs, spacemacs, now doom.
|
| [1] https://github.com/emacs-evil/evil
| iterati wrote:
| I'm curious if you've already used evil with vanilla why
| you'd migrate to spacemacs or doom. I've never found
| either to add much that a custom config can't get to
| easily and with more control. Maybe that's changed in the
| past half-decade or so since I last tried Spacemacs,
| though.
| vvillena wrote:
| The vim bindings are only one part of Spacemacs. The
| other (and I'd say most important) part is the SPC menu
| that exposes hundreds of keybindings in a discoverable,
| unobtrusive, and interactive interface.
| Klwohu wrote:
| Isn't that also just an elpa / melpa package though?
| vvillena wrote:
| I guess so? And if the aim is to make something
| completely custom, that's fine. But the Spacemacs
| keybindings are very well thought out, the configuration
| is just as important as the feature itself.
| TeMPOraL wrote:
| Definitely go for GccEmacs (feature/native-comp) branch if you
| haven't yet. Despite being experimental, it's pretty much
| stable. I've been running it for over half a year as a daily
| driver, and seen zero issues (but much performance
| improvements!). Similar stories abound on-line.
|
| Wish something be done about proper threading support, but I
| understand it's a herculean task at this point.
|
| (For those unfamiliar, GccEmacs is a parallel branch of Emacs
| that uses libgccjit to compile ELisp straight to native code.
| It does it transparently - compiling in the background and then
| substituting bytecode-compiled functions for native-compiled.)
| chriswarbo wrote:
| > Wish something be done about proper threading support, but
| I understand it's a herculean task at this point.
|
| I would agree about adding concurrency and parallelism; but
| threading is very much a WorseIsBetter approach, which I
| certainly wouldn't like to use directly.
|
| Co-routines or futures would seem a better fit for Lispy
| semantics. Actors seem too different and heavyweight, but I'd
| still prefer them to threading!
| taeric wrote:
| I'm actually somewhat unclear in what the goals of
| threading are, at times. Pushing a process out and having a
| sentinel on a buffer has long been possible.
|
| What is the aim?
| TeMPOraL wrote:
| Make it more light-weight and do it without needing a
| foreign binary. If your elisp program needs to offload
| some computations to a background thread, you don't want
| to make a binary specifically for it - it would destroy
| the flexibility and portability of otherwise perfectly
| fine elisp code.
| TeMPOraL wrote:
| I said "threading" as a catch-all term. Whatever makes
| Emacs able to fully utilize multiple cores of a CPU would
| work.
| taeric wrote:
| I'm curious what sort of performance you are hit by. For me, it
| is mainly org source buffers that I did not flag as async.
|
| That and tramp not working too well over crappy internet. :(
| Decabytes wrote:
| I work in the medical field, which requires me to view large
| xml files and multi patient csv files with years of patient
| history. The CSVs contain embedded pdf strings that are long
| strings of bytes in the file. Emacs struggles to copy and
| paste, and move around in the large CSVs.
|
| For the large XML files, I have to switch to fundamental
| mode, because it struggles to highlight everything, and
| sometimes the xmls are pure ass and are basically all on one
| line. I've written a python script that will prettify the xml
| because emacs locks up when I try to do that. My colleagues
| just tell me to use sublime text.
| taeric wrote:
| Ah, yes. Long lines are known bad. I will be excited to see
| anyone give a way to fix that with minimal impact on the
| rest of the system.
|
| I'm curious why other editors don't trip as badly on long
| lines.
| throwanem wrote:
| Tramp works a lot more reliably if you customize where Emacs
| puts your backups and autosaves, such that they're stored
| locally instead of remotely. The Emacs wiki has details on
| how to do that:
| https://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/BackupDirectory
| tsimionescu wrote:
| The biggest problem I have with Tramp performance is much
| deeper, the need to open a new connection for every request
| - it makes integrating other modes with Tramp much more
| difficult than I would hope for (e.g. I tried to make
| kubernetes-mode work over tramp, and it mostly did, but
| each refresh had to reconnect, which would freeze the whole
| Emacs GUI for a second or so; thankfully kubel-mode has a
| more complete implementation that handles this gracefully).
| taeric wrote:
| You still have this problem even with a control master
| setup with ssh?
| tptacek wrote:
| This was problematic even with SSH multiplexing?
| psanford wrote:
| I've had this in my config for a long time. Seems to make
| tramp work a lot better: ; use ssh
| instead of scpx mode for tramp ; this should work
| a lot better with ssh connection sharing (setq
| tramp-default-method "ssh")
| taeric wrote:
| I can't and don't blame tramp, per se. My internet has
| regular hiccups of being completely disconnected. Pretty
| sure that is not fixable. :(
| throwanem wrote:
| Not by Emacs, but locally storing backups and autosaves
| means it only matters when you're actively reading or
| writing a file via Tramp.
| taeric wrote:
| Absolutely. It just sucks, as my build are so much faster
| on the remote machine. :)
|
| That is, a lot of my remote editing is not just idle
| edits, but edit, run build, burn down compile output of
| tests and other items I'm working.
|
| If I really want hell, I'll try and run lsp remotely.
|
| None of this would matter, if I hadn't built up so much
| muscle memory from when I did have good internet and it
| did just transparently work.
| agumonkey wrote:
| gccemacs works remarkably fine for such a big change, it does
| bite my poor x201 hard on the compiling phase (we're now as
| modern as lein clojure bootstrap :cough:) but it does bring
| speed improvements already.
| Smithalicious wrote:
| I use pre-release Emacs with the nativecomp branch ("gccemacs")
| and Doom. Starts in 2.1 seconds and it's blazing fast.
| Definitely the best thing to come to Emacs for me in a long
| time, very exciting.
|
| I can't wait for it to hit release so everybody can play with
| it!
| whobar wrote:
| Any warts when using it with Doom? I only recently switched
| from vim to Doom, and I love it, but it can be a bit laggy
| when using it with some of the C/C++ IDE features turned on.
| Smithalicious wrote:
| It works very well with Doom, Doom has support for it and
| detects it's available and does everything for you. Just
| compile Emacs and run doom upgrade as usual.
| wiz21c wrote:
| I have built gccemacs a week ago. I didn't see much
| difference in speed and it breaks wanderlust... Are there
| things to know to get the speed (and yes, I've checked it was
| enabled during ./configure :-)) ?
| newusertoday wrote:
| are binaries available somewhere, i tried compiling it about
| year ago but quit after struggling with few dependencies.
| davidw wrote:
| Going on 25 years with Emacs. Lots of other things I've changed
| over the years, but still happy with Emacs and Postgres.
| lovelyviking wrote:
| I wish to use Emacs, but those keyboard shortcuts do not make
| any sense for me.
|
| Is there a way to have emacs with custom shortcuts as a
| _ready package_ where I can modify those shortcuts before
| digging in with all the rest.
|
| I do not mind keyboard shortcuts in gneeral and use them all
| the time, it's just those in Emacs are hard to learn/remember
| knowing that I wish to change them anyway .
|
| I am looking for the way to set those by myself but it seems
| I need to learn _a lot_ before I can do it and thus it blocks
| me from moving forward with exploring Emacs deeper.
| TacticalCoder wrote:
| > Is there a way to have emacs with custom shortcuts as a
| ready package where I can modify those shortcuts before
| digging in with all the rest.
|
| I've got a very custom Emacs keybindings/shortcuts setup
| but... Sadly it requires some hackery: basically there's
| the whole major/minor modes shenanigan where one mode's
| shortcut can take precedence over the other(s). And if you
| want to define your own shortcuts which take precedence,
| all the time, over everything else, you need to dig a bit
| deep. And then even deeper because invariably there's this
| or that minor mode you'll want to use where after all you
| won't want your own shortcut but that one of the mode.
|
| > I am looking for the way to set those by myself but it
| seems I need to learn a lot before I can do it
|
| Sadly this is true. I've got I'd say about 100 lines of
| code related only to keybindings. Now, once set up, it's
| pure bliss. For example I've got mod+{i,j,k,l} to move the
| cursor around, anywhere (text, menus, anything). It makes
| even more sense than vim's hjkl (ijkl mimics the cursor
| arrow keys layout, which is more natural and ijkl is easier
| to type than hjkl too).
|
| > ... and thus it blocks me from moving forward with
| exploring Emacs deeper.
|
| I can understand that. I'd say the easiest would be to
| define your own minor mode as explained here:
|
| https://stackoverflow.com/questions/683425/globally-
| override...
|
| This should get you started: if you do it like in the
| answer and make sure they always take precedence you should
| be good to go and can deal with the gory details later on.
| m1n1 wrote:
| Well, if you already know vim keystrokes, just use
| Spacemacs. The big win is easy discoverability: using the
| space bar as a menu-starter, and when you find the command
| you want, it tells you what key stroke you could have used
| instead.
| davidw wrote:
| It's a good question, but asking someone who has used Emacs
| for 25 years... I'm pretty happy with them, and indeed, do
| my best to have them replicated in other software I use
| such as shells and browsers.
| rataata_jr wrote:
| Anyone running the jit Emacs? Can't wait for it. I did try
| compiling it from source for my linux setup. Would love to see it
| on windows.
| lsllc wrote:
| Yes, it's pretty solid running Doom Emacs. There's a handy
| macOS build script/helper:
|
| https://github.com/jimeh/build-emacs-for-macos
|
| The author curates a list of "known good" commits to the
| feature/native-comp branch so you don't waste your time with
| bad builds:
|
| https://github.com/jimeh/build-emacs-for-macos/issues/6
| hypersoar wrote:
| I've been using it for a few months on wsl and it's been great.
| I'm using the Nix package and have run into only a couple of
| minor issues.
| rataata_jr wrote:
| That's a good idea, will finally try nix package manager on
| windows.
| bambataa wrote:
| I've just tried it on macOS, built by this tool:
| https://github.com/jimeh/build-emacs-for-macos
|
| Unfortunately it keeps locking up my entire computer so might
| not be a goer just yet.
| rurban wrote:
| Running the native-comp + wayland copr on fc32 for about a
| year, whithout any problem. About 3x faster.
|
| https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/deathwish/emacs-pgtk...
| TeMPOraL wrote:
| Over half a year now, as a daily driver. Personally on Ubuntu,
| at work on WSL (Windows Subsystem for Linux) - which I then
| x-forward to an VcXsrv on Windows.
|
| Works pretty much flawlessly, and it's much snappier on some of
| the workloads I put it through - like big collections of big
| Org Mode files, or viewing (and fontifying) large files.
| iib wrote:
| I have compiled straight from source on the feature/native-comp
| branch, and it works noticeably much faster. I am actually
| scared of going back to the regular Emacs, as I may find it way
| too slow.
|
| I am not sure how much it is from native Emacs, as when I did
| this, I also enabled all the other recommended optimizations
| from lsp (increasing the gc threshold early in the config,
| installing and compiling with native json support etc.)
|
| As far as I know, the latest branch has all the necessary flags
| enabled, so you can just do ./autogen.sh &&
| ./configure --with-nativecomp --with-xwidgets --with-json &&
| make -j4 && make install
|
| after you installed the dependencies and cloned the Emacs repo
| (--with-nativecomp may actually be set to default now in this
| branch). You also need a very recent version of gcc, as the
| libgccjit is somewhat new, and it may err on the compilation
| process.
| taeric wrote:
| I also enable march=native for the compile. My guess is it is
| mostly placebo, but I feel it helps.
| iib wrote:
| I only know of this discussion[1] on Daniel Lemire's blog
| regarding -march=native, which seems to have the "it's
| complicated" conclusion. But yes, _theoretically_ that is a
| way to compile for better performance, for your own
| machine.
|
| [1] https://lemire.me/blog/2018/07/25/it-is-more-
| complicated-tha...
| taeric wrote:
| Yeah, "complicated" sums it up perfectly. I know it
| /should/ be faster. And, it does feel so. But, I don't
| have hard data to prove it, such that I have to ack it
| could just be placebo.
| indy wrote:
| It looks like the configure option has been renamed to
| --with-native-compilation
|
| on the feature/native-comp branch (and it has to be specified
| otherwise it defaults to no)
| prussian wrote:
| I am. I honestly don't notice much of a difference, but at the
| same time I keep seeing deferred compilation warnings for
| plugins I have added via straight.el
|
| I've been using https://github.com/flatwhatson/guix-channel to
| manage it. I don't recommend trying the Pure GTK+ stuff yet
| though; some context menus don't seem to work. Specifically,
| treemacs rename seems broken with PGTK.
| TacticalCoder wrote:
| > Anyone running the jit Emacs?
|
| I'm running the "native-comp" (libgccjit) branch daily since
| months and months now: not a single problem here and I've got
| quite a "heavy" config (thousands of lines of custom config and
| all the usual suspects: magit / org-mode / lsp / cider etc.).
|
| > I did try compiling it from source for my linux setup.
|
| And it worked? Worked on the first try for me (on the Debian
| distro).
|
| I was somehow expecting lots of problems (because it's one heck
| of a change) but it really all just compiled and worked
| perfectly fine.
| rataata_jr wrote:
| I followed this tutorial from mastering emacs blog iirc. I
| built it inside docker. I think it worked on the first try
| for me as well. I didn't use it much since it was in docker.
| voodoologic wrote:
| I found an easy installer for native-comp (for mac os).
| https://github.com/d12frosted/homebrew-emacs-plus I'm new to
| emacs and so I am unaware how much faster it is or isn't.
| brightball wrote:
| I tried Emacs after reading so much about it lately...but I don't
| understand how people use it. The sheer volume of key
| combinations always in play to do things makes my hands hurt.
|
| It made me see the appeal of some of those concave keyboards.
| neolog wrote:
| Many people find it helpful to swap ctrl with capslock.
| widdershins wrote:
| I'm just getting into Emacs (~4 months) and I'd say that I have
| probably ~40 key-commands memorized. I M-x search for
| everything else and I still find it to be an excellent
| experience. I'm building my config and muscle memory very
| slowly, but enjoying every minute.
| DocTomoe wrote:
| That's me, two years ago, when I made the switch from vi.
|
| In the end, the key combinations are something to learn - but
| the productivity increase makes them worth learning. And for
| the handcramp thing: Realize that you have two control, and two
| meta keys on a standard keyboard.
| wyuenho wrote:
| and... flickering is back on the NS port.
| abzug wrote:
| Alan Third (the NS maintainer) said on reddit that "It's too
| big and invasive a change for Emacs 27."[1]
|
| [1]:
| https://old.reddit.com/r/emacs/comments/mc82yk/flickering_em...
| wyuenho wrote:
| Too bad. I wish they could just stop breaking things.
| abzug wrote:
| It's fixed on HEAD if you don't care about running from
| trunk. Otherwise, I suggest you to use Mitsuharu Yamamoto's
| Mac Port: https://bitbucket.org/mituharu/emacs-mac
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-03-25 23:02 UTC)