[HN Gopher] Nyxt: The Hacker's Browser
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Nyxt: The Hacker's Browser
        
       Author : sathishmanohar
       Score  : 574 points
       Date   : 2023-05-19 20:22 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (nyxt.atlas.engineer)
 (TXT) w3m dump (nyxt.atlas.engineer)
        
       | jvanderbot wrote:
       | Never in my life have I been excited about a browser, until now!
        
       | friend_and_foe wrote:
       | I'm a qutebrowser user and I really have been rolling it around
       | in my head to check this out and switch to it. My main issue with
       | it is that I develop userscripts for qutebrowser (not
       | greasemonkey scripts, qutebrowsers version of extensions) and the
       | lisp only thing in nyxt bugs me. I like lisp, but I'm stronger in
       | other scripting languages. The benefit is of course i would not
       | be limited at all to functionality because any part of nyxt can
       | be modified.
       | 
       | It seems like an absolutely fantastic project and I shall see if
       | I want to invest in the effort it takes to move.
        
       | keyle wrote:
       | I personally use Orion Browser (macOS) and Homerow (macOS) and it
       | gets me in a similar situation, without the buffer stuff, and
       | with a more traditional setup. I can recommend that if you're
       | looking for an alternative.
        
       | xkcd1963 wrote:
       | Can it be run on a server?
        
         | vindarel wrote:
         | I expect you can run it in headless mode (new --headless
         | switch), start a Swank server (the backend of Slime, the
         | backend of the most used CL "language server"), and connect to
         | the Lisp process from home, through a SSH tunnel. And control
         | the browser from the Lisp REPL, or a Lisp script, like we would
         | with any running Common Lisp program.
         | 
         | https://lispcookbook.github.io/cl-cookbook/debugging.html#re...
        
         | graderjs wrote:
         | If you want a remote browser capable of running on a server
         | (with the client, browser UI in a regular web page) check out
         | BrowserBox: https://github.com/dosyago/BrowserBoxPro
        
         | ktm5j wrote:
         | Can you clarify what you mean? It can certainly be run on
         | hardware that you call a server, just would depend on if you're
         | running a graphical environment, it's not able to run in a
         | terminal emulator afaik.
        
       | sicariusnoctis wrote:
       | The main thing I miss in these vi-like browsers is a tab tree
       | sidebar like Sidebery.
        
       | asimjalis wrote:
       | Lisp programmability. I love this already.
        
       | xwdv wrote:
       | Can it spoof the user agent? Unfortunately browsing a site with a
       | strange browser can often get you treated like a second or even
       | third class citizen.
        
         | vntok wrote:
         | It's even more suspicious to security layers to spoof the UA
         | while keeping a different SSL handshake profile (or a different
         | JA3 hash).
        
       | cutler wrote:
       | Why is the only Mac option a non-default, local repo-based
       | Macports installation? What's wrong with a binary or a port that
       | is actually listed in Macports? Isn't that the whole point of
       | Macports?
        
       | msie wrote:
       | I've always thought of developing a Hacker's browser. One where
       | there are no restrictions of what it can do. For example, you
       | can't write a chrome extension to spoof the Referrer header on
       | requests. The Chrome browser is more locked down than you think.
        
         | extheat wrote:
         | What other restrictions are you referring to? This SO post
         | seems to cover how to change headers (including Referrer) in
         | Chrome API: https://stackoverflow.com/q/30999159/11173996
         | 
         | There is also Chromium which you can build and patch if you
         | really need low level changes to the browser not achievable
         | from JS, but nothing immediately comes to mind to necessitate
         | that.
        
           | msie wrote:
           | It doesn't look easy to change and even then, there is some
           | doubt whether it works with newer Chrome versions. Anyways,
           | the Chrome developers are purposely making hard if not
           | impossible to change the Referrer and other headers. Part of
           | the blame is to comply with standards but there should be
           | some flag to turn off that behaviour.
        
         | modeless wrote:
         | Doesn't this one do that?
         | https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/referer-control/hn...
        
           | msie wrote:
           | Hmm, if you look at the reviews, it doesn't seem to work for
           | everybody. Also seems to make a "referrer" header instead of
           | "Referrer".
        
         | hattmall wrote:
         | VB webbrowser control. I'm pretty sure you could do anything
         | imaginable.
        
       | vrglvrglvrgl wrote:
       | [dead]
        
       | do-me wrote:
       | Awesome project! From the website I wasn't quite able to tell
       | where exactly and how AI comes into play. I think apart from
       | fuzzy searching headings a semantic search functionality for the
       | whole text would be a really nice default feature. I implemented
       | frontend-only semantic search with transformers.js here:
       | geo.rocks/semanticfinder. The implementation is very
       | straightforward and it would be easy to integrate in the browser,
       | maybe as a plugin or similar.
        
         | 8organicbits wrote:
         | The code references stochastic modeling[1] for predicting the
         | users next command. There may be other places too.
         | 
         | https://github.com/atlas-engineer/nyxt/pull/2593
        
       | raman162 wrote:
       | This looks like my type of browser. I currently rely heavily on
       | the vimium chrome extension.
       | 
       | Does this support profiles by any chance? I currently use chrome
       | profiles to separate work and personal
       | 
       | Looking forward to giving it a spin
        
         | lez wrote:
         | You can use your OS to do that: Run: `env HOME=~/nyxt-profile-
         | work nyxt` and `env HOME=~/nyxt-profile-personal nyxt` for
         | separating profiles.
        
         | dimator wrote:
         | you should also checkout https://qutebrowser.org/ which is
         | pretty mature.
        
           | rochak wrote:
           | A dealbreaker as it doesn't suppport ublock origin extension
           | which is essential to browsing the web these days.
        
             | yokem55 wrote:
             | Qutebrowser can use the same adblock filters that ublock
             | uses.
        
               | lost_tourist wrote:
               | Not really as customizable though, ublock has useful
               | features like build your own filter and pick/create to
               | block annoying webpage widgets. I do wonder if the python
               | based aspects of qutebrowser might give a large surface
               | to fork it and make this type of "hacker's browser" out
               | of it though.
        
       | kovac wrote:
       | This looks really good, will be trying it out. Looks like they
       | wrote their own rendering code as well? Or are they using some
       | other rendering engine?
        
         | leephillips wrote:
         | WebKit and Webengine. And the versions of these renderers that
         | this and similar projects like qutebrowser use are just too
         | full of bugs to be a main browser. That's why I don't use them,
         | although I would really love to.
        
           | kovac wrote:
           | Thanks for the information. Yes, this is why I stopped using
           | qutebrowser too.
        
       | uoaei wrote:
       | This looks like it could become a powerful web crawler with
       | relative ease.
        
       | nittanymount wrote:
       | not for mac sadly...
        
         | 3np wrote:
         | FAQ says Mac support is experimental so any hacker should be
         | able to compile it?
        
           | ynniv wrote:
           | Last time I tried I was unable to sort out the dependencies.
           | IIRC it was something to do with Qt and sbcl.
        
       | AndrewKemendo wrote:
       | This looks like a modern browser UI with an embedded cli that
       | uses the page as a database!
       | 
       | Genius! I'll be trying it out
        
       | jerryzh wrote:
       | One thing that stopped me from using it is unable to sync
       | history.
       | 
       | Is someone familiar with how hard it would be to use the hook
       | system to allow it to sync with e.g. firefox android?
        
       | p-e-w wrote:
       | Looks like Nyxt, a browser "inspired by Vim", inherits Vim's
       | showstopper bug: Being unusable on many non-US keyboards, at
       | least with the default bindings. The 'switch-buffer-previous'
       | command is bound to C-[, which cannot be pressed e.g. on QWERTZ
       | layouts because the [ character requires AltGr. This is like
       | sending around text files encoded in Windows-1252 and expecting
       | things to just work.
       | 
       | Sorry folks, but it turns out that the creators of Vi(m) _didn
       | 't_ actually invent the ultimate UI paradigm half a century ago.
       | It's bad enough that a text editor that ignores the past few
       | decades of UX research is still in widespread use, but please,
       | for the love of God, _stop_ incorporating that broken paradigm
       | into new products.
       | 
       | What a pity, because Nyxt looks like a well-designed piece of
       | software otherwise.
        
         | SanderNL wrote:
         | Yes and calculators have the same issue. I mean, what about
         | Indian numerals, Ethiopian and how does one perform a _proper_
         | Coptic calculation using these awful devices with showstopping
         | UX flaws?
         | 
         | It's time we pander to each and every culture's random
         | conception of symbol manipulation and end this era of
         | universal, gate-keeping, commonality. The time of personalized
         | input devices is upon us.
         | 
         | Vim and thus this browser is unusable on my custom 20% HIQPK
         | layout numpad.
        
           | trinix912 wrote:
           | Remember that most European keyboards don't have [ and ]
           | accessible on the first/second level. That's already half of
           | the western civilization, not some random's custom layout.
        
             | olodus wrote:
             | Yes, mine for example. Swedish keyboard layouts are
             | horrible for coding. The [ and lots of other symbols
             | require super weird hand movements to input. That is why
             | when I code I usually use an American layout keyboard
             | instead.
             | 
             | However, even if I wouldn't switch - wouldn't it just be to
             | remap the keys in my config?
        
             | anthk wrote:
             | European here. I don't care, I don't use the Spanish
             | layout, it sucks for programming. No one uses that at
             | professional level for programming, US-Intl it's much
             | better with the menu/super_r key as the 'compose' one.
        
             | tincholio wrote:
             | I'm from South America, and have lived in Europe for over
             | 20 years, and I use a US layout, with compose key. It gives
             | trivial access to accents and more, without the annoyance
             | of different layouts (I used AZERTY for years while living
             | in France, and it's just atrocious). I know many people
             | here in Finland who code with a nordic layout, and for the
             | life of me, I don't understand how they remain sane.
        
             | anthk wrote:
             | Also, remember that Nyxt it's a Lisp based browser, so for
             | sure has an Emacs layout.
        
             | knerz wrote:
             | https://eurkey.steffen.bruentjen.eu/
             | 
             | Has the US keys on the first/second levels and most/all
             | special symbols for European languages easily accessible w/
             | modifier keys. Entirely removed the need to switch keyboard
             | layouts for me.
        
               | trinix912 wrote:
               | That's nice but doesn't include the letters used in
               | Slavic languages.
        
             | crabbone wrote:
             | I live in Europe and buy my Chinese-made keyboards from
             | Amazon, US. In the company I work for, I have not seen a
             | single keyboard with "European" layout. People who buy
             | those keyboards aren't people who need to be good at using
             | their editor, while on the other hand, people who want to
             | be good at using their editor will buy a keyboard that
             | works well with it.
             | 
             | Keyboard is a one-time investment of 20-200 Euro, but
             | learning to use your editor efficiently is an investment of
             | years of your life... amplified by the fact that there
             | aren't that many good editors. So, any person who needs to
             | work with the editor on a daily basis will have to make a
             | choice between buying a keyboard that works well with that
             | editor or a keyboard that allows them to type Euro / Pound
             | sign more easily... And nobody in this situation is going
             | to choose the keyboard that doesn't work well with the
             | editor.
        
               | trinix912 wrote:
               | Yet nobody here has thought of just localizing the
               | shortcuts like Microsoft Office and macOS have been doing
               | for ages. Solves this problem very elegantly. Ironically,
               | Word is the "professional" editor of most professions
               | outside of coding, and people do learn the shortcuts to
               | use it effectively.
               | 
               | This obviously varies by country, but at the places I've
               | worked at, most people used the local layout instead of
               | the US one. They couldn't bother relearning it and then
               | switching every time they wanted to enter some text in
               | the local (Slavic) language.
        
             | Gud wrote:
             | I switch between keyboard layouts all the time, depending
             | on which input language I need to use. I simply cycle
             | between the langugaes I write in(Swedish, German and
             | English) by pressing alt and caps lock.
             | 
             | I accept that U.S. English is the computer lingua franca.
        
               | cobbaut wrote:
               | Same (US-qwerty and BE-azerty). Which is easy on a blank
               | keyboard.
        
         | chjj wrote:
         | The road to hell is paved with UX research.
        
           | eimrine wrote:
           | Sadly, but the goal of those UX research is not a user's
           | satisfaction.
        
         | cryptonector wrote:
         | It's a pity that your negative, flame-baity comment is the top
         | comment on this post.
        
         | brabel wrote:
         | If you have trouble hitting [ how do you ever program anything?
         | 
         | I use multi-language keyboard layouts and switch all the
         | time... when coding (or using "hacker" software like this,
         | which is completely based on emacs [and as far as I know is
         | written in Common Lisp], not vim), just use a layout that makes
         | it easier (in my case, en-AU).
        
           | p-e-w wrote:
           | Entering [ works just fine on QWERTZ: You simply press
           | AltGr+8.
           | 
           | But this doesn't work in shortcuts, e.g. when combined with
           | Ctrl. That is, AltGr+8 generates the character '[', but
           | Ctrl+AltGr+8 is _not_ the same as pressing Ctrl+[ on
           | keyboards that have a dedicated [ key.
           | 
           | This bug is decades old, and every Vim derivative suffers
           | from it.
        
             | brabel wrote:
             | I use Cmd+[ on MacOS to "go back" on multiple software like
             | IntelliJ, emacs (I probably configured it) and Firefox, so
             | I would say this is a pretty common combo. It's easy to
             | remember, specially given that the mirror, "go forward", is
             | Cmd+]. As I said, even though my first language is not
             | English, I only write code in an English keyboard layout so
             | I've never even considered that [ is "hard to press".
             | 
             | EDIT: the Dr Racket editor even lets you write Lisp using
             | '[' and ']' because they don't require pressing shift like
             | '(' and ')' so are easier to press.
        
               | cschmatzler wrote:
               | Using [ and ] is completely normal in so many
               | applications. QWERTZ just is a bad design, and
               | applications shouldn't have to work around that by making
               | keybindings more difficult. My team has ~100 engineers in
               | QWERTZ countries and I don't know a single one of them
               | that actually uses it. QWERTY is the standard order for
               | all new laptops. Nobody complains.
        
             | mst wrote:
             | Does that mean that one could trap Ctrl+AltGr+8 and map it
             | to the same effect? (and the same for 7/9/0 if required)
             | 
             | If so, I'll try and remember that if ever tempted to use
             | Ctrl and {[]} together I need to handle that as well.
        
             | zelphirkalt wrote:
             | All the time while reading this thread I could not remember
             | an issue like that from the time I used Vim/NeoVim. Perhaps
             | it somehow did not affect me? At least in Emacs that works
             | exactly like it should.
        
         | kagevf wrote:
         | Nyxt has a vim mode, but it's more inspired by emacs, and
         | therefore fully customizable.
        
         | can16358p wrote:
         | This!
         | 
         | I've been programmer for about 20 years now and I could never
         | understand why Vi(m) or Emacs exists with those weird bindings
         | which are completely different from pretty much everything
         | else.
         | 
         | I'm not that old, maybe they had their cake in 80s, but perhaps
         | time to move on to something modern which would have modern
         | defaults (if many need to customize there's something wrong
         | with the defaults) that appeal to all keyboards.
        
           | crabbone wrote:
           | > I've been programmer for about 20 years now and I could
           | never understand
           | 
           | I doubt there's any hope for you... but from other thing you
           | said:
           | 
           | > are completely different from pretty much everything else.
           | 
           | I can conclude that you were programming something that's not
           | a typical modern computer. I.e. you never used things like
           | terminal (with readline), never red a manpage, never used
           | pagers like more / less, which would mean that you also never
           | used the most popular operating system in the world, where,
           | for instance, if you need to get access to its service logs,
           | they'd open in a pager...
           | 
           | I mean... was it like 20 years of Scratch programming on a
           | game console or something? Or maybe COBOL on a MF? Like, what
           | were you doing all these 20 years that kept you so far away
           | from _the most popular thing in the world_?
        
             | can16358p wrote:
             | Started with Flash/ActionScript. Then C#. Now JS/TS.
             | 
             | Yup, I'm pretty much working with terminal everyday, though
             | nowadays most popular thing seems to be Vscode.
             | 
             | Maybe you should modernize yourself instead of attacking
             | people with a childish level of humiliation.
        
           | cryptonector wrote:
           | Modal editing exists because the mouse didn't exist then, and
           | it continues to exist because modal editing is very powerful
           | because you get to be in a mode where you type commands for
           | cursor movements, textual transformations, etc., which allows
           | power users to be very productive.
        
             | astrange wrote:
             | I don't think I've ever seen evidence that emacs users
             | actually need to be very productive in their text editor
             | even if it works.
             | 
             | Though it might not work - the original Mac user research
             | found that keyboards make users think they're faster, but
             | don't actually make them faster, because of time blindness.
        
               | cryptonector wrote:
               | I wouldn't know. I'm a vi user. I don't know how much
               | more productive I am with VI than non-modal editors, and
               | even if I did know that would just be anecdotal, but I
               | _feel_ more productive coding in (Neo)vi(m) than I do in
               | any non-modal editor, and it 's much more comfortable
               | anyways.
        
               | mpenick wrote:
               | Do you have a link for that claim?
        
           | p-e-w wrote:
           | > I could never understand why Vi(m) or Emacs exists with
           | those weird bindings which are completely different from
           | pretty much everything else.
           | 
           | Inertia, traditionalism, elitism, insider culture, ignorance,
           | "good enough" mentality, blind spots, cargo culting, ...
           | 
           | There's really no mystery here. The reasons are the same as
           | in every other part of society where outdated conventions are
           | maintained despite massive, obvious problems. The phenomenon
           | itself is as predictable as the arguments used by its
           | defenders, mostly variations of "it works for me".
        
             | mst wrote:
             | I use heirloom vi (while making it clear when asked that I
             | doubt the person asking me should do the same ;)
             | 
             | I was basically forced into learning vi to begin with
             | (editing things on a -very- heterogenous collection of
             | servers) but then found after a few weeks that I found it
             | surprisingly pleasant and stuck with it.
             | 
             | Then again I don't recall sending a vi instance anything
             | involving the control key except for Ctrl-C, Ctrl-L and
             | Ctrl-Z.
        
             | wkat4242 wrote:
             | I think there's more reasons that are not so negative.
             | 
             | First of all, vi predates all those others. That means it's
             | always had an active userbase werken other tools were in
             | fashion. Changing the bindings at any point in time would
             | have hurt a lot of people's muscle memory. It would also be
             | extremely annoying when one has older versions on some
             | machines with the old bindings and some with the new. I
             | deal with the Mac vs Windows/Linux copy paste problem every
             | day.
             | 
             | Also, vim just has a ton of functions and there's always
             | going to be some shortcuts that will be awkward on some or
             | other keyboard layout.
             | 
             | Finally, you don't have to use it :) or you could
             | distribute your custom config file with bindings to every
             | machine you use.
        
             | cschmatzler wrote:
             | ... or also because it's significantly more productive than
             | any other editor. But hey, it's much easier for you to
             | assume everyone making a choice for themselves is part of
             | some cult than giving them the ability to think and make
             | good choices.
        
           | bornfreddy wrote:
           | Vi has a steep learning curve, but once mastered, it is on-
           | par or exceeds the best of other editors. It is also present
           | everywhere (on Linux at least) and works via ssh as well as
           | locally.
           | 
           | I'm not using it anymore myself, but I know and respect
           | people who do. For me the tradeoff was not worth it, however
           | it still annoys me to hell and back that I have to reach for
           | the mouse so often in vscode.
        
             | can16358p wrote:
             | I see.
             | 
             | I develop mostly mobile apps and I need to be using
             | mouse/trackpad anyway frequently so that's not an issue.
             | 
             | Though about the keyboard part: I'm used to Vscode's
             | keyboard shortcuts too (and I can in no way say I know all
             | of it) and I can easily navigate and code in Vscode too.
             | 
             | Perhaps many people who got used to those tools developed
             | muscle memory so much that they can't give Vscode (or
             | anything modern) the chance it deserves.
        
               | bornfreddy wrote:
               | I also use keyboard shortcuts (obviously), but in some
               | cases it seems impossible to configure them - for example
               | maximizing the terminal window vertically seems to not be
               | supported by shortcuts.
        
         | orbital-decay wrote:
         | A _paradigm_ is something more high-level than a very specific
         | keybind conflict. Mature vim mode addons for browsers are
         | layout-insensitive. How do you think j /k work on non-Latin
         | (e.g. any Cyrillic) layouts? And they do.
         | 
         | That's an oversight of Nyxt in particular.
        
         | crabbone wrote:
         | As a long-time Emacs user who also occasionally uses Vi and
         | very rarely Vim... but also knows a bunch of people who are in
         | the later camp: nobody in that camp buys / uses "non-US"
         | keyboards. Even on "US" keyboards, the amount of remapping a
         | typical user does to their keys is significant.
         | 
         | In other words: you are complaining about a problem that
         | doesn't exist. Users who want Vim / Emacs experience don't want
         | keyboards that don't work well with their editor of choice.
         | They will not be in a situation where they have to adjust their
         | editor to the keyboard layout. If there's a mismatch, then the
         | keyboard will be adjusted, not the editor.
         | 
         | Now, I'm not sure how Vi(m) users handle other written
         | languages, but since I every now and then have to write in two
         | non-Latin languages, in Emacs, I keep buffers for those
         | languages with input method set accordingly. However, say, I
         | need to write in Cyrillic, I still use the en_US modified
         | QUERTY layout that I use for everything else + phonetic
         | transliteration into Cyrillic. This is both easier for touch-
         | typing, as I don't have to memorize several different layouts,
         | and this method makes more letters easily available than there
         | would've been on a physical keyboard.
         | 
         | So... no. _don 't stop_ incorporating Emacs / Vi key usage into
         | new products. It works great.
         | 
         | Also:
         | 
         | > ignores the past few decades of UX research
         | 
         | Except there was none. Unless you mean it in the same way how
         | for some reason people who make HTML pages call themselves "UX
         | developers". What happened is that big companies wanted to sell
         | products that looked "impressive", but offered worse user
         | experience overall. This is how MSVS, Eclipse, and similar
         | happened. There's literally no UX research on how people deal
         | with typing text into computers. Whereas in practice, what I
         | see is that people who use "visual" tools just suck at writing
         | text. And, myself, having worked with both "visual" editors and
         | Emacs / Vi, I would literally refuse a job position if I had to
         | work with VSCode / IntelliJ products.
        
         | anthk wrote:
         | I am a Spaniard which I learnt to use the ES layout as the 100%
         | of the Spaniards and then I realized it sucked a lot for
         | programming symbols. If you use Linux/BSD for programmaing and
         | don't run something like "setxkbmap us -option ctrl:swapcaps
         | -option compose:rwin" (or menu instead or rwin in order to use
         | menu+'+a to type a, you are losing your time. Stuff like
         | "recogera" can be easily written with menu+' made solely with
         | the right hand as a pinch and 'a' with the left key. The only
         | issue is 'n' which is a bit cumbersome to type, but there
         | aren't many words with 'n' usable in the same context.
        
           | mst wrote:
           | The other approach I've seen is having some sort of weird key
           | combination (like "hitting both shift keys at once") to
           | switch back and forth between two layouts. I saw somebody
           | using it for QWERTY vs. DVORAK but it seems like it'd be
           | viable for two language layouts too.
        
         | bharrison wrote:
         | True, Hackers hate changing settings.
         | 
         | Imagine if those precious keystrokes wasted on setting a
         | keyboard layout could instead be utilized usefully. Say, to
         | post some cloying, whiny critique of someone else's work,
         | wherein one might go so far as invoking their diety in the
         | hopes it might stem the tide of what, I guess, must be a
         | massive recent influx of vi(m)-keybinding-based projects.
        
           | mattigames wrote:
           | if Vim had the very same problem for US keyboard layouts it
           | would have never become the standard choice for "hackers"
           | (e.g. in a parallel universe where Vim was created by a
           | Japanese for Japanese keyboards), so yeah, in general hackers
           | hate when their tools don't work out of the box, hackers
           | expect the very basics of any tool to work out of the box,
           | changing settings should be a step to accommodate it to your
           | liking, not to fix basic functionality.
        
             | tourmalinetaco wrote:
             | > if Vim had the very same problem for US keyboard layouts
             | it would have never become the standard choice for
             | "hackers"
             | 
             | Not necessarily, since it'd just be a matter of
             | popularizing Vim + the community's preferred shortcuts as a
             | starter instead.
             | 
             | > in general hackers hate when their tools don't work out
             | of the box
             | 
             | Indeed we do. However, we don't give up on something if it
             | doesn't work. We simply _hack_ at it until it works how we
             | want ;)
        
               | mattigames wrote:
               | > Not necessarily, since it'd just be a matter of
               | popularizing Vim + the community's preferred shortcuts as
               | a starter instead.
               | 
               | There isn't that many software dev tools were a small
               | variation in key bindings (or some similar small change)
               | became ubiquious and propelled the popularity by adapting
               | it to the local needs of American developers/IT (keyboard
               | layout in this case), it's a chicken and egg problem
               | because if Vim wasn't that popular there wouldn't be much
               | interest in creation preferred shortcuts, so I conclude
               | that what you suggested is not what would have happened.
        
               | pineaux wrote:
               | I love the true scotsman arguments in this subthread.
               | Defining "hackers" as this or that.
        
           | Faark wrote:
           | Having settings is nice, but I'm not gonna spend a lot of
           | time configuring something that I'm not yet sure will even be
           | useful to me. Power users of / users already invested in your
           | product will use settings to great effect, sure. But defaults
           | matter, if you target anyone else.
           | 
           | Actually, you probably understand that on a deeper level.
           | Since we are not talking about a product where "you can
           | configure vim bindings in the settings". Its just that you
           | personally appear to like this default and seem offended by
           | others preferring sth else.
        
             | usrbinbash wrote:
             | The problem with defaults is, someone won't like them
             | anyway, so trying to make them likeable to everyone, isn't
             | going to happen, no matter how hard we try.
             | 
             | Using ViM as an example, using the keys that are prevalent
             | on a US keyboard, was a sensible approach when it was
             | developed, and since remapping the keys is probably one of
             | the easiest things to do, it's also not an issue. In fact,
             | writing a simple remap into a text file is easier than
             | remapping keys in most "modern" editors, where the option
             | to do so usually lives behind 2 sub-menus hidden behind a
             | hamburger-button, and forcing me to scroll down an endless
             | list that may or may not have a search function. And good
             | luck if I want to export/import my config, or, god forbid,
             | check it into a repo.
             | 
             | > But defaults matter, if you target anyone else.
             | 
             | Products have to target an audience and cater to them.
             | That's how we ended up with alot of the modern webapps
             | sharing the same usability problems, because "being like
             | everyone else because that's what the audience is familiar
             | with" encourages stagnancy, not evolution.
             | 
             | FOSS Tools on the other hand, have the freedom to explore
             | ideas. If people don't like these ideas, they don't have to
             | use the tools.
        
         | muti wrote:
         | Hardly sounds like either a bug or a showstopper when you can
         | rebind any command
        
           | p-e-w wrote:
           | When a product is unusable without changing configuration, it
           | absolutely is a bug. Being customizable is great, but being
           | broken by default is not.
           | 
           | Besides, the whole point of Vim bindings is supposed to be
           | that they are the same everywhere (muscle memory yadda yadda
           | yadda). When you have to change core bindings to something
           | random to make them work, that whole idea falls apart, and
           | you're probably better off using the platform standard
           | bindings for everything. Plus, you get the additional benefit
           | that the software fits in with the rest of the system, rather
           | than sticking out like a sore thumb.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | alpaca128 wrote:
             | _> the whole point of Vim bindings is supposed to be that
             | they are the same everywhere_
             | 
             | No, the point is customizability to tweak it to your
             | personal needs. Vim has the most flexible keybinding system
             | I've seen in a program so far. If you want "same
             | everywhere" any editor will do. I have never in my life
             | seen anyone make this argument that one of the most
             | customizeable editors is meant to be used without
             | configuration.
             | 
             |  _> you 're probably better off using the platform standard
             | bindings for everything_
             | 
             | Or maybe I use Vim exactly because it fits my workflow
             | better than the standard that was designed for the average
             | user as a series of historical accidents?
             | 
             |  _> When a product is unusable without changing
             | configuration, it absolutely is a bug_
             | 
             | It's not a bug, it's a design based on how 99% of input
             | devices in the region it was created in work. Just like US
             | electrical appliances that you can't just plug into
             | European power sockets. And honestly you're blowing this
             | way out of proportion, very few Vim keybindings are
             | incompatible with QWERTZ keyboards. I know because I used
             | Vim for years with a QWERTZ keyboard and never felt limited
             | by that.
        
             | usrbinbash wrote:
             | > Besides, the whole point of Vim bindings is supposed to
             | be that they are the same everywhere (muscle memory yadda
             | yadda yadda).
             | 
             | No, the whole point of ViM bindings is that MY bindings are
             | the same everywhere. That's why it's main config is a
             | simple textfile that I can just `git clone` or `sftp` onto
             | whatever machine I intend to spend more than a few seconds
             | writing code on.
             | 
             | Which, incidentially, is something that is an absolute
             | PITA, if it's possible at all with the more "modern"
             | editors, or on the off chance it isn't a PITA, usually
             | depends on some specific platforms offerings.
             | 
             | > Plus, you get the additional benefit that the software
             | fits in with the rest of the system, rather than sticking
             | out like a sore thumb.
             | 
             | Well, from my PoV, what with i3 desktop, vim in the
             | terminal, and the browser being the only GUI application
             | that I use regularly, vim seems to fit in pretty well with
             | everything else.
        
             | theK wrote:
             | I've heard this argument in variations from QERTZ users.
             | The thing is, programming was invented with the QWERTY UX
             | in mind. The fact that the German keyboard resembles the
             | American keyboard for 80% of its Lay-out doesn't change
             | that.
             | 
             | You don't hear the Arabic, Chinese or Greek crowds complain
             | about this, they just switch layouts.
        
             | RhodesianHunter wrote:
             | >When a product is unusable without changing configuration,
             | it absolutely is a bug
             | 
             | I don't think that adage applies when the target user is
             | the average VIM user
        
               | dexterdog wrote:
               | But the average vim user is jumping to new instances
               | often, so if he has to reconfigure it everywhere he might
               | as well install a different editor with a config.
        
               | alpaca128 wrote:
               | I have over 100 custom keybindings in my Vim config and
               | can assure you I can still use the default configuration
               | without any issues, it's just a bit slower.
               | 
               | The few settings I find really important can just be
               | quickly set with a couple commands. No big deal.
        
               | irishloop wrote:
               | I am not sure thats true. vim does give you extra utility
               | in its availability on a wide variety of server-type
               | platforms, but I suspect most vim users are using it
               | actively for development on their local (or docker etc)
               | boxes
        
               | sodapopcan wrote:
               | Yep, lots of us "Vim as a local IDE" users out here. I
               | haven't "jumped around machines" in years.
               | 
               | Vim is a nugget of battle-tested familiarity in an
               | industry of constant change.
        
               | usrbinbash wrote:
               | Lets see, how many commands does it take me to port my
               | entire vim config to a new machine? Ah, right...one.
               | git clone https://github.com/MY_USERNAME/vim.git
               | 
               | Not exactly what I'd call a difficult or time consuming
               | method.
        
               | zamnos wrote:
               | you missed the _~ /.vim_ at the end
        
         | evilspammer wrote:
         | [dead]
        
         | dirkg wrote:
         | Vim style keybindings and navigation is massively overhyped as
         | is vim itself.
         | 
         | Cue endless debates about how Vim is the best ever ...... I'm
         | sick and tired of everyone telling me that their neovim setup
         | with a tiling window manager with million customized rc files
         | is somehow better than vscode with a mouse (which mind you
         | still has plenty of keyboard shortcuts) with sane windows.
         | /rant
        
           | xigoi wrote:
           | I personally don't like having to use a whole browser engine
           | to edit text, and being reliant on a greedy user-hostile
           | corporation for it.
        
           | z_open wrote:
           | Why do comments like this always ignore the obvious solution
           | of using an IDE like code with a vim plugin. And yes that's
           | more efficient.
        
             | danieldk wrote:
             | I tried vi emulation VS Code for a while, but the emulation
             | is often incomplete and breaks at times.
             | 
             | The only thing that emulates vi well enough is Evil in
             | Emacs.
        
               | brirec wrote:
               | Try embedding a real neovim into vscode: https://marketpl
               | ace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=asvetlia...
        
           | mst wrote:
           | There's a class of fanboys who will be telling you about that
           | because they're Really Excited that they got it Just How They
           | Wanted It.
           | 
           | Most of us think "we like it, some people don't, great if
           | it's an option, probably shouldn't be the only option
           | anywhere else."
           | 
           | The one-upmanship (over VSCode in your case but all editor
           | wars get a dishonourable mention) is bullshit but, like,
           | random strangers on the internet tell people with crippling
           | depression "hey, you should do <thing>, it fixed -my-
           | depression" so I think you have to just accept that "when
           | something works really well for a human, sometimes they get
           | overexcited and start trying to turn the something into a
           | silver bullet that it isn't" is something that will always
           | happen.
           | 
           | Note: The people doing the arseholish one-upmanship are not
           | in any way forgiven by this, and the "everyone telling you"
           | that you describe would aggravate me as well, but as with the
           | Rust Evangelism Strike Force, you just have to nod and smile
           | (and sometimes point and laugh) at the zealots and look at
           | the technology for yourself.
           | 
           | Note 2: I use the original 1970 Bill Joy vi. Other people I
           | know use VSCode. 'better' is relative, and what works best
           | for any given person/project varies wildly - everything
           | before this note is about the dynamics of people discussing
           | such choices.
        
         | nurettin wrote:
         | Have you tried C-u and C-+ ?
        
         | Eldt wrote:
         | You're not going to get a default that suits everyone. Stop
         | being so sensationalist and just rebind them.
        
           | p-e-w wrote:
           | What nonsense. Every single modern operating system has
           | bindings that are usable with all keyboard layouts. Having
           | such a default is not only possible, it's the status quo
           | everywhere, except in software designed during the era of the
           | moon landings.
        
             | BeetleB wrote:
             | You're not wrong about the poor default keybindings. When
             | the effort to fix it on your part is probably less than all
             | the time you've spent complaining about it, chances are you
             | _really_ are not part of the intended user base.
        
             | colordrops wrote:
             | So use a normal browser. Don't use one self-described as
             | being for _hackers_.
        
             | RhodesianHunter wrote:
             | >Every single modern operating system
             | 
             | So something completely unattainable by a small dev team on
             | a startup budget. Great! These are the standards by which
             | we prevent any good things from being created.
        
               | p-e-w wrote:
               | You don't have to "develop" anything, you just have to
               | follow the binding conventions for the platform(s). In
               | practice, this simply means using
               | Ctrl/Cmd+[LETTER/NUMBER] for everything, and the problem
               | is solved.
        
               | flagrant_taco wrote:
               | Tell that to my pinkies. Reaching for
               | Ctrl/Cmd+[LETTER/NUMBER] when navigating entirely by
               | keyboard is a really bad idea.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | wkat4242 wrote:
               | Even that won't work everywhere. French keyboards have
               | the numbers under shift (yeah really...)
        
         | jan_g wrote:
         | Ha, true! But also interesting, how differently we work. I
         | switch to national keyboard layout only when I have to write an
         | email/chat message with my compatriots or maybe a document that
         | needs those national characters. Otherwise, I just use US
         | layout for everything. Like 99% of time I'm on US layout. It
         | makes much more sense when programming (not just brackets, but
         | also quotes, colons/semicolons, slashes, backticks, etc.),
         | which is my primary use of computers.
        
           | xigoi wrote:
           | I'm Czech and use the UCW layout which works exactly like US
           | English, but allows me to enter Czech letters with AltGr.
           | It's so much better than the traditional Czech layout.
        
         | linmob wrote:
         | Honestly, as a fellow QWERTZ-native, QWERTZ is generally a
         | terrible layout for doing any programming in languages that go
         | beyond round brackets. Instead have all these umlauts you
         | rarely need, even in normal writing, right there - just a bad
         | tradeoff.
         | 
         | One might even argue that it's terrible for some other keyboard
         | shortcuts, as they stop making sense: E.g., when Ctrl+Z is undo
         | and Ctrl+X is redo, that makes perfect sense on QWERTY, but is
         | hard to grasp on QWERTZ. Yet this is seemingly never
         | customized/"translated", even in software that customizes other
         | shortcuts (e.g., in word processing).
         | 
         | So, long story short, do yourselves a favor and don't use
         | QWERTZ for serious computer use ;-)
        
           | nier wrote:
           | If you're using QWERTY as a QWERTZ-native, chances are you
           | have a curious mind that won't settle for the status quo.
        
           | croes wrote:
           | Do you know how often I need umlauts if I want a proper
           | variable name?
        
             | wuiheerfoj wrote:
             | Not sure what language you speak, but in German umlauts can
             | always be replaced with an ,e' suffix. Having written
             | codebases in German, I've never seen anybody actually use
             | special chars in a var names! (probably a carryover from
             | the pre-UTF-8 dark ages)
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | thepostman0 wrote:
           | Talking of rarely need, most 105-key boards have numeric pads
           | that are dust covered. TKL layouts are the future and they
           | have an additional fn modifier, maybe there's room here to
           | add another purpose to it.
        
           | europeanNyan wrote:
           | This sounds like a lot of gatekeeping. QWERTZ types need not
           | apply for serious computer use. Even worse are those ones who
           | would prefer to write a proper e-mail using umlauts.
        
             | linmob wrote:
             | Now, you can complain about gatekeeping, or you can set up
             | more than one keyboard layout (I have yet to run into a
             | reasonable OS or DE that does not allow for this), and
             | switch around when it's appropriate.
             | 
             | Other ways to accomplish this would be coming up with
             | macros or custom shortcuts (e.g., with one or more
             | modifiers), to type the characters you don't have on an UK
             | layout.
             | 
             | All of this is way easier to do than to fix all the 'bugs'
             | in well established programs that have shortcuts that don't
             | work or don't make sense on QWERTZ (or, to take it further,
             | in the native language attached to that language - :wq
             | should be :sb in German. ;-) )
             | 
             | My intention here was not to gatekeep, but to make the
             | case/share my experience that when I first forced myself to
             | use a different (UK [1]) keyboard layout and set my
             | computer to English, many things that previously were
             | cumbersome and hard to remember and did not really make
             | sense, suddenly were easy to memorize and made perfect
             | sense. It was almost life-changing!
             | 
             | Now: Should (1) it be this way, or should (2)
             | internationalization/translation be way better? Certainly
             | (2), but I just don't see it happen, neither in commercial
             | (cost), nor in free (lack of contributors) software.
             | 
             | [1]: Don't do this, US international ISO is better:
             | https://www.farah.cl/Keyboardery/A-Visual-Comparison-of-
             | Diff...
        
           | wkat4242 wrote:
           | Spanish keyboards, while QWERTY, are terrible for this too.
           | All the special characters are in a weird place and many
           | require modifiers.
           | 
           | While I live in Spain now I still use the US layout I'm used
           | to from the Netherlands. It means I can't type the Spanish
           | accents which are kinda important but anyway...
        
             | cfn wrote:
             | Same here with Portuguese keyboards! I gave up on them 30
             | years ago and adopted UK or US layouts. For a long time I
             | wrote a kind of pidgin Portuguese due to this but
             | eventually learned the Portuguese layout by heart using
             | both US and UK layouts.
        
             | okl wrote:
             | Try the EN intl layout. Most of the accents are accessible
             | using AltGr. Also the ! and ?
        
               | wkat4242 wrote:
               | The problem with this is that it works differently on
               | each OS. Every day I use Windows, Mac, Linux and FreeBSD.
               | I need an input method that is unified in every OS or
               | I'll constantly mistype. Apple's different shortcuts for
               | copy paste are difficult enough already.
        
               | anthk wrote:
               | Using super_r+'+a is not that bad. Super_r+' can be done
               | with ease with the right key as a pinch.
        
         | agumonkey wrote:
         | Any pointers to research? As an emacser I consider most of vim
         | very very :repeat efficient. I'm very much still open to new
         | ergonomic ideas though, I just never see any.
        
         | TheRoque wrote:
         | I'm curious about what "decades of UX research" improvements
         | you are talking about, to me everything about the UI for text
         | editors or browsers hasn't improved much in decades. If you
         | have a laptop with just a touchpad, chances are you'll never
         | get better than vim keybindings. Moreover, the keyboard layouts
         | themselves are centuries old.
        
           | p-e-w wrote:
           | > I'm curious about what "decades of UX research"
           | improvements you are talking about
           | 
           | Here's the most important one of them: Don't surprise me.
           | Blend in. Look and behave like other programs.
           | 
           | There are 50 applications on my system. Yours is one of them.
           | If all other applications use 'Ctrl+C' for copying text, but
           | your application uses 'y', then your application is the
           | problem.
        
             | xigoi wrote:
             | Vi is several years older than the Ctrl+C shortcut for
             | copy. How could it possibly have know that Ctrl+C would
             | become a more popular choice for copying?
        
             | spoonfeeder006 wrote:
             | Thats a basic principle. But when you say decades of UX
             | research you imply actual new ways of doing things
             | 
             | And something innovative _and_ effective would be both self
             | explanatory and actually useful, so it ultimately gets
             | adopted by others instead of simply surprising and
             | confusing people
        
             | usrbinbash wrote:
             | > Don't surprise me. Blend in. Look and behave like other
             | programs.
             | 
             | There is hardly anything in the world that blends in better
             | with everythign else, then a terminal application between
             | other terminal applications.
        
             | gsinclair wrote:
             | That would be a problem if vim was installed front and
             | centre on everybody's computer and they were all expected
             | to use it. That is not the case. You choose to use it, so
             | you either accept, or better yet, embrace that y=copy, or
             | you choose to use something else.
             | 
             | Trying to objectively describe vim as a problem by invoking
             | UX research is very funny.
             | 
             | The end result of that logic is to rule out modal editors
             | altogether.
        
             | 8organicbits wrote:
             | What are you talking about? I suspect you haven't used vim
             | recently.
             | 
             | In the context of the command line Ctrl+C sends SIGINT,
             | which usually interrupts/terminates a program. When I press
             | Ctrl+C, vim shows "Type :qa and press <Enter> to exit Vim".
             | All my command line programs handle it as SIGINT. Imposing
             | Ctrl+C as copy would be inconsistent and surprising.
             | 
             | If I'm using Visual Studio with vim keybindings
             | Ctrl+C/Ctrl+V are still copy/paste (I suspect this is
             | because VS provides this and the keybindings don't override
             | it). I think every other editor with vim keybindings I've
             | used preserves this behavior. Ctrl-C as copy is consistent
             | with every other windowed program I'm running. Where have
             | you encountered vim keybindings that don't permit this?
        
             | akho wrote:
             | But Nyxt (which is modeled on Emacs, not Vim) would blend
             | in for me. I spend most of my time in Emacs and Firefox; I
             | would prefer a browser that blends in.
             | 
             | I don't know about 50 applications. The rest of the
             | applications I use are more specialized, and have their own
             | shortcut madness. Browsers ate most of the small stuff.
        
             | crabbone wrote:
             | > Don't surprise me.
             | 
             | How's this a "research"? It's just about you, your
             | attitude, your lack of experience with computers...
             | 
             | Why should anyone take seriously claims coming from someone
             | who didn't even bother to learn to use the thing they claim
             | to have bad user experience?
        
         | usrbinbash wrote:
         | > C-[, which cannot be pressed e.g. on QWERTZ layouts because
         | the [ character requires AltGr.
         | 
         | So the user just presses Ctrl-AltGr-[, what's the problem? And
         | changing keyboard layouts or keybinds, isn't something that
         | someone using vim should have a lot of trouble with anyway.
         | 
         | > It's bad enough that a text editor that ignores the past few
         | decades of UX research is still in widespread use,
         | 
         | Maybe that's because a lot of people using it decided that the
         | "decades of UX research" produced precious little of worth.
         | That's because alot of the "research" done in areas that are,
         | by their nature, heavily opinionated, produces, what a
         | surprise, mostly opinions.
         | 
         | And when we take a giant pile of opinions, and pile them all on
         | top of one another, well...
         | 
         | ...that's how we ended up in a world where, somehow, people now
         | actually have to wait for an application to open, like they did
         | in the early 90s, on machines that are orders of magnitude more
         | powerful. Where webpages load 20MiB of giant hero images,
         | useless framework code and spyware, to display 4 lines of text.
         | Where applications get more "modern" and "streamlined" by
         | somehow lowering information density, losing functionality and
         | getting less self-explanatory.
        
         | doctor_eval wrote:
         | > Sorry folks, but it turns out that the creators of Vi(m)
         | didn't actually invent the ultimate UI paradigm half a century
         | ago
         | 
         | I have been thinking the same for years. Some guys at work used
         | to add Vim bindings to their IDE and I just didn't understand
         | it.
         | 
         | I used VI back in the day when the choice was vi or ed. It
         | worked well given the constraints of a Wyse60 or VT100. But I
         | was happy to leave it behind for X windows, a mouse, and
         | modeless editing.
         | 
         | So today, 25 years after I learned VI because I had no choice,
         | the idea that having Vi bindings makes a tool for "hackers" is
         | just not something that resonates with me. I'm happy to
         | discover I'm not the only one.
        
           | cryptonector wrote:
           | What's key about vi is modal editing. Modal editing is very
           | powerful. It also means not having to use the mouse for
           | everything and also not having to type too many modifier key
           | sequences. For some of us that's absolutely essential to
           | avoid deviations that lead to injury.
        
             | doctor_eval wrote:
             | I don't really understand. Many of the common bindings in
             | Vim use modifiers. How do you navigate back a word without
             | a modifier? Do you just exit editing mode like in the old
             | days? Do you just forgo this and arrow back?
             | 
             | In case it's not clear from my tone, I'm totally
             | sympathetic to relieving injury, and whatever works, works.
             | I just don't understand how Vim bindings help, and am
             | genuinely curious.
        
               | cryptonector wrote:
               | Ah, I forgot some context: I use sticky keys, so for me
               | shift is not a problem, but I still have bad habits from
               | before discovering sticky keys so control and other
               | modifiers -and especially multi-modifier combinations-
               | are still a problem for me, and vi doesn't use that many
               | of those.
        
               | cryptonector wrote:
               | > Do you just exit editing mode like in the old days?
               | 
               | Yes! I very much do. I do not use the arrow keys for
               | cursor movement in edit mode.
        
               | mst wrote:
               | In fact, it got to the point where I realised I was only
               | ever hitting the arrow keys by accident while in insert
               | mode so my vimrc now contains:                   inoremap
               | <Left>  <NOP>         inoremap <Right> <NOP>
               | inoremap <Up>    <NOP>         inoremap <Down>  <NOP>
               | 
               | (the rest is at https://trout.me.uk/X11/vimrc)
        
               | gsinclair wrote:
               | Navigating back a word while in insert mode is just
               | unnecessary.
               | 
               | The purpose of insert mode is to insert text, and that's
               | it. This occupies a very small proportion of total
               | editing time.
        
               | doctor_eval wrote:
               | > Navigating back a word while in insert mode is just
               | unnecessary.
               | 
               | Speak for yourself! I do it all the time. Navigating by
               | word is my primary means of moving through a line.
               | 
               | Maybe that's why I'm happy to be free of vi. It was my
               | primary editor for at least 10 years. And I'm happy to
               | see the back of it.
        
               | wander_homer wrote:
               | Can you provide a concrete example, like a piece of text
               | with the current cursor position, the outcome you want to
               | achieve and the sequence of shortcuts you're using to
               | achieve that with your favorite text editor?
               | 
               | > Navigating by word is my primary means of moving
               | through a line.
               | 
               | So how does your new editor do that more efficiently than
               | pressing <Esc> once, followed by pressing <w> or <b> once
               | for each word?
        
               | doctor_eval wrote:
               | Navigating by word is a matter of holding the Option key
               | and pressing left or right arrow. Same number of keys,
               | but works pretty much everywhere. The box used to enter
               | this comment, for example.
               | 
               | Just to be super clear, I don't care what other people
               | do. Go nuts with vi bindings. I was just agreeing with
               | what someone else said, that vi bindings aren't peak UI
               | and that "hacker" != "vi"
        
               | wander_homer wrote:
               | No, you suggested that leaving insert mode to navigate by
               | words is somehow less efficient (since navigating by word
               | is your primary way to navigate in lines) and that maybe
               | that's why you're happy you stopped using vi.
               | 
               | Now we found out that leaving insert mode to navigate by
               | words requires the "same number of keys", so @gsinclair
               | was right and it is unnecessary to stay in insert mode
               | for navigation.
               | 
               | > Same number of keys, but works pretty much everywhere.
               | The box used to enter this comment, for example.
               | 
               | If efficient word navigation was the only thing vim key
               | bindings had to offer I wouldn't be using them. But they
               | do offer many things the current text box does not offer
               | and since (as a programmer) I'm spending 95% of my time
               | in an IDE and not some browser text box, I'll gladly
               | accept some inconsistencies if that means editing and
               | navigating in my IDE becomes more pleasant.
        
           | wuiheerfoj wrote:
           | > Some guys at work used to add Vim bindings to their IDE and
           | I just didn't understand it.
           | 
           | I'm one of these guys.
           | 
           | I'm used to its text editing hotkeys from years of using it,
           | but when jumping between a bunch of languages/environments
           | it's a lot easier to leverage the ,integrated' nature of a
           | lot IDEs (in my case Jetbrains).
           | 
           | Having to find, configure and remember how to use a bunch of
           | different debuggers, linters, codegen tools and other tools
           | manually is a pain
        
       | dicytea wrote:
       | Did a quick run with it and turned on vi mode from the settings
       | menu.
       | 
       | The first thing I found awkward about it is that prompt fields
       | are always initiated in normal mode. So if you want to execute a
       | command with _:_ or interact with an element using _f_ , you have
       | to manually activate insert mode first before being able to enter
       | text into the prompt.
       | 
       | I'm _sure_ there 's a way to change this since the entire thing
       | is in Lisp, but it sure is an odd default.
        
         | mst wrote:
         | if it's a fresh field, I think I might turn out to prefer them
         | always initialised the same way for the sake of my muscle
         | memory.
         | 
         | Now, that may not be true of -me- in practice, but it's
         | definitely possible for whoever did implement that part to
         | genuinely prefer it that way.
         | 
         | Of course, if the implementer wasn't a vi user, who fucking
         | knows, vi is kinda baroque as fuck if you run face first into
         | it without preparation so "the person who picked that default
         | was trying to do vi users a solid but had to guess at some
         | bits" is totally viable too.
        
       | badrabbit wrote:
       | You know what would be cool, if you could use unix cli tools in
       | the browser. Press control+<space>, a small console box shows up
       | and run:
       | 
       | |grep ...|awk ...
       | 
       | And the text of the document gets processed. But if you want to
       | mess with the dom you could:
       | 
       | Html.Body | sed ... | jq ...
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | GlumWoodpecker wrote:
         | This probably wouldn't be possible due to browser sandboxing.
         | 
         | You could however, use a tool like External Application Button
         | [0] in order to send the URL of the page to a script/program,
         | which in turn can make the body of the page parsable by
         | downloading the URL it gets, automating some action on it. I
         | use it pretty often to automate downloads with yt-dlp or
         | opening a picture directly in GIMP from the browser, but since
         | you're invoking a bash/python/whatever script, the
         | possibilities are basically endless.
         | 
         | [0]: https://github.com/andy-portmen/external-application-
         | button
        
           | schemescape wrote:
           | > This probably wouldn't be possible due to browser
           | sandboxing.
           | 
           | I'm curious about this comment. Surely this should be
           | possible using accessibility hooks for a normal browser or in
           | Nyxt via scripting, right?
        
           | aidenn0 wrote:
           | > You could however, use a tool like External Application
           | Button [0] in order to send the URL of the page to a
           | script/program, which in turn can make the body of the page
           | parsable by downloading the URL it gets, automating some
           | action on it.
           | 
           | This works less well than it used to now that CMSs and blogs
           | are now SPAs that render no text without javascript being
           | enabled.
        
             | GlumWoodpecker wrote:
             | Yes, that is a shame, but that can be worked around by
             | sending it to something like PhantomJS, headless Chromium,
             | or any other scriptable browser that will actually run the
             | JS on the page and render it in the background. Very heavy
             | as you're basically running a full browser in the
             | background, but totally doable.
        
           | badrabbit wrote:
           | I was thinking of running gnu binaries like that as a WASM
           | compiled app/pwa
        
         | newcup wrote:
         | The page content piping could be done e.g. like this:
         | (defun get-buffer-text (&optional buf)
         | (nyxt/mode/document:select-all buf)
         | (nyxt/mode/document:copy buf)         (trivial-clipboard:text))
         | (define-internal-page cmd-result (&key text) (:title
         | "*Result*")         (spinneret:with-html-string
         | (dolist (line (str:split #\newline text))             (:p
         | line))))            (define-command-global buf-text-to-pipe-cmd
         | (&optional buf cmd)         (let* ((buf (or buf (nyxt:current-
         | buffer)))                (safe-text (uiop:escape-sh-token (get-
         | buffer-text buf)))                (cmd (or cmd (prompt1 :prompt
         | "cmd: " :sources 'prompter:raw-source)))                (cmd-
         | output (uiop:run-program                             `("bash"
         | "-c" ,(str:concat "echo '" safe-text "' | " cmd))
         | :output :string)))           (nyxt:buffer-load-internal-page-
         | focus 'cmd-result :text cmd-output)))
         | 
         | And then call the function like C-space buf-text-to-pipe-cmd
         | and specify the commands to pipe to. Output will appear in a
         | new buffer that can be further used as the source for piping.
         | 
         | DOM handling would be a tad more laborous, but you can pick DOM
         | elements from output of nyxt:document-model with CSS selectors
         | using clss:select.
        
         | mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote:
         | You could probably add this to Nyxt in a solid hour or two of
         | configuration hacking.
         | 
         | The "configuration" is just more code that gets compiled in on
         | loading. It's a complete first class citizen unlike extensions
         | for most software which is sandboxed in a separate language and
         | can only see certain APIs.
         | 
         | In Nyxt, StumpWM, Emacs, and other Lisp software you can
         | literally put bugfixes in your config, redefine existing
         | functions, and generally do whatever the hell you want.
        
           | sureglymop wrote:
           | That is good! I have been creating some add ons for firefox
           | and what i dislike the most is that i can't just easily
           | modify the UI of the browser itself. I hate that i can't
           | change stuff even if i am only creating add-ons for myself...
        
       | bee_rider wrote:
       | I've always assumed the major browsers had all sorts of security
       | stuff going on behind the scenes, and using a small alternative
       | like this (or suckless surf) was just asking for trouble. But, I
       | don't have any real knowledge about security stuff.
       | 
       | How misinformed is my take? Are these kinds of browsers OK? I'd
       | like something light, if possible.
        
         | smokeypanda wrote:
         | Lightweight web browsers don't have as large of an attack
         | surface, particularly if they eschew JS, cookies, etc or you
         | disable them. Nyxt is alpha software, so YMMV until it's more
         | feature complete, and independently audited to correctly
         | implement WebKit and WebExtensions. Run Tor Browser without JS
         | in a VM for security+privacy.
        
       | jug wrote:
       | Hmm, not sure it's for me (a bit too much hacker) but I'd
       | definitely like a highly customizable, module based browser with
       | a pure shell by default. Something like Visual Studio Code but
       | with less cruft from the get go.
       | 
       | I've never thought about it until I saw this! Now I'm really
       | irked about there not being a solid, mature browser based on
       | extensibility. Where the base is basically an address bar and
       | history awareness (i.e. back/forward) and even bookmarks is a
       | module, so that you don't even need an integrated solution but
       | can instead rely on e.g. Raindrop.io as your bookmarks manager.
       | Tab management another one, so for example you could have _only_
       | a powerful vertical tabs mode if that's all you need.
       | 
       | You know what, it feels like this should have happened 20 years
       | ago and it would be as popular as Vim or Emacs now, but somehow
       | never actually did. It would be the ultimate response to Chrome,
       | Edge, even Firefox feature creep, forcing its developer to commit
       | fully to web renderer excellence (speed, RAM, web standards) and
       | maybe some optional official modules if you want them.
        
         | rakoo wrote:
         | uzbl (https://www.uzbl.org/) used to do that but it seems it
         | was too heavy in practice.
         | 
         | Today I'm more interestea in turning the web into a more
         | textual format to integrate it in acme (http://acme.cat-v.org/)
         | which is already built around modularity. Making the web a
         | content provider and letting me interact withit the way I want
        
         | tenebrisalietum wrote:
         | There was uzbl.
        
         | graderjs wrote:
         | I'm building something similar: WebDriver protocol not WebView
         | tag, more extensible, written in JavaScript, web tech. Get in
         | touch (cris@dosyago.com) if you want to contribute! or check
         | out the project: https://github.com/dosyago/BrowserBoxPro /
         | https://github.com/dosyago/BrowserBOx
        
           | soulofmischief wrote:
           | I commented here [0] and am extremely interested in
           | discussing BrowserBox with you. This is something I've
           | brought up over and over, I'm an experienced web dev and
           | generalist but simply couldn't tackle on my own.
           | 
           | Curious about your roadmap with dosyago and BrowserBox, where
           | our goals converge and diverge and how we can help each
           | other. Feel free to reach out via email, it's in my bio.
           | 
           | [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36008340
        
             | graderjs wrote:
             | Dude! I can't parse your email but like definitely reach
             | out to me: cris@dosyago.com :D ;p
        
               | kdrag0n wrote:
               | Looks like it's reversed :)
        
               | graderjs wrote:
               | Haha I guess i was too dumb to see that! ;p :)
        
               | culi wrote:
               | This is a very cool interaction and I hope it turns into
               | something. Would love a place to keep up if anything ever
               | materializes.
               | 
               | Here's some other projects you might have inspo or
               | crossover with and some discussions you might find
               | possible collaborators in:
               | 
               | Bonsai https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28446147
               | 
               | Mullvad Browser (security oriented FireFox-based)
               | https://mullvad.net/en/browser
               | 
               | Browsh (purely text-based browser)
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17487552
               | 
               | Ladybird (browser from scratch for SerenityOS)
               | 
               | Kosmonaut (browser from scratch in Rust)
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24170201
               | 
               | Refresh (concepts for a new kind of web browser)
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17638477
        
               | graderjs wrote:
               | Thank you kindly, this is such a good list i want to see
               | if i can add it to our projects README.
        
           | RhodesianHunter wrote:
           | >written in JavaScript
           | 
           | Really though? Why
        
             | graderjs wrote:
             | Two main reasons:
             | 
             | While it may not be as technically elegant as using lisp,
             | it greatly increases the count of folks who can contribute
             | and simplifies the code with a single language for both
             | front and back.
             | 
             | Secondly, while, in general terms, JavaScript is not as
             | performant as Java or C++, for asynchronous real time
             | operations, such as mostly used by this application, the
             | event loop in node, a layer over io_uring, is a highly
             | highly efficient method to perform these.
             | 
             | In other words, we get to trade simplicity for raw
             | performance to ease maintainability, and less complex code
             | means less security risk and bugs. In fact, the bottleneck
             | in this application for performance is not JavaScript but
             | network link latency, and the browser and the hardware that
             | runs on.
        
         | graderjs wrote:
         | > I've never thought about it until I saw this! Now I'm really
         | irked about there not being a solid, mature browser based on
         | extensibility. Where the base is basically an address bar and
         | history awareness (i.e. back/forward) and even bookmarks is a
         | module
         | 
         | If you guys are really into the idea of an extendable
         | virtualized browser API, an extendable browser that you can
         | hack on, and customize programmatically fully (including all
         | the browser UI, the so-called "chrome"), then my BrowserBox
         | project might be for you.^0^1^2
         | 
         | That open extendable browser is actually my vision of
         | BrowserBox and I think it's a really powerful thing. For
         | example: I imagine being able to create an "extension store"
         | using the more powerful set of APIs enabled by this (compared
         | to the more limited APIs available to regular browser
         | extensions). Similar to the idea you related where bookmarks is
         | a module--which is something we've wanted to do for a long time
         | --but not sure about the API contours!
         | 
         | The other ideas you talk about are all great, too: a UI that
         | can be fully customized (vertical tabs!) or even tree tabs /
         | history. Or all kinds of crazy things. Browser UIs are pretty
         | uninnovative mostly, but a fully customizable UI could really
         | open that up.
         | 
         | Modules ideas (that in some sense we've been exploring at
         | Dosyago over the last few years, through DiskerNet, client
         | projects, GraderJS and so on):
         | 
         | - web scraping / automation script builder
         | 
         | - vim shell
         | 
         | - vertical tabs UI
         | 
         | - bookmarks
         | 
         | - public / shared bookmarks
         | 
         | - full text searchable bookmarks (DiskerNet)
         | 
         | - NodeJS shell (GraderJS)
         | 
         | And I think BrowserBox may have the right model for that
         | extensibility (maybe not totally right but the idea of: instead
         | of using a WebView tag you're using the much more extensible
         | and powerful set of APIs for browser instrumentation and
         | automation in other words, the "remote debugging protocol"
         | APIs) to create the surface of extensibility. And our company
         | has already built the the application with the browser UI at
         | the front, and the instrumented browser engine at back to
         | enable that building out an API. Our system is already a fully
         | functional browser: with multiple tabs, back/forward history,
         | but no other modules!
         | 
         | The main modules we have built so far have been: web scraping /
         | automation script building for clients. We've experimented with
         | other modules, but the majority of the work we need to do is
         | around carving out the contours of that API. What surface do we
         | provide in order to make modules really great? That's the key
         | question and one we are looking for help answering.
         | 
         | Having that API for the browser to allow like a modules type
         | thing is something that's been on our plans for a long amount
         | of time we always thought it was a good idea, but we've never
         | been sure if there was much demand for it. Like you say here
         | this Nyxt project really highlights the fact that this is
         | something that really is a good idea or at least it seems like
         | it and definitely people seem like they want it. There's still
         | a lot of problems with this approach, but I believe they all
         | have achievable solutions!
         | 
         | While our project may not be as technically elegant as using
         | lisp, but I think it has the prosaic advantage of: having a
         | simple client/server architecture (browser UI at the front,
         | instrumented engine at the back); using a highly extensible set
         | of powerful API's that are on essentially standard track with
         | the WebDriver specifications (making, at least in theory, the
         | future ability to swap out the browser engine between Chrome,
         | Firefox, Safari, or whatever else that supports WebDriver); and
         | I think most importantly--it's written in JavaScript, Node.JS,
         | HTML, CSS--greatly widening the field of potential contributors
         | 
         | I'm encouraged today by this project and the thread you have
         | started to push our BrowserBox project more in this direction
         | and I would like to encourage people to come on and check it
         | out and because of that we are opening up our projects today to
         | contributions. I think there's a lot of work to do and we can't
         | do it alone!
         | 
         | 0: https://github.com/dosyago/BrowserBox
         | 
         | 1: https://github.com/dosyago/BrowserBoxPro
         | 
         | 2: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35996647
        
         | comfypotato wrote:
         | Contemplating my navel, I propose that it didn't happen because
         | the purpose of an editor and browser are so different.
         | (Realistically the driving factor is that an editor is much
         | more useful for making money.)
        
           | wahnfrieden wrote:
           | I'm building it
        
             | replwoacause wrote:
             | As in... you've been building it, or you just started
             | building it because of this comment?
        
               | wahnfrieden wrote:
               | I've been building it
        
         | hattmall wrote:
         | I use to build my own like this with the VB web browser
         | control. I had tons of automation built in for a lot of tasks
         | but it becomes too much to keep up with. I've looked into
         | headless chrome but it's not as cool as working in the Visual
         | Studio and being able to pause and just develop on the fly.
         | 
         | Honestly it was incredibly cool but websites just get more and
         | more complicated. From like 2004 to maybe 2014-2016 it was
         | great. Somewhere after that, I'm not sure, something changed,
         | maybe me, but it just became too much.
        
           | culi wrote:
           | The web standard really has exploded since that time range
           | you mentioned. Nowdays there's a native browser API for text-
           | to-speech. It's easier to generate speech for an article you
           | wrote than it is to style an option in a native <select>
           | element
        
         | soulofmischief wrote:
         | So I've ranted about this in various places on the internet...
         | 
         | Some recent HN comments of mine:
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34855750
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33541173
         | 
         | I am 100% down for building this, open source, if I had a team
         | to help me see it through as it's just too much for one person.
         | 
         | Do you have any dev experience / interest in helping create
         | such a thing?
        
           | ghostpepper wrote:
           | How much work would it be to convert either Firefox /
           | Chromium / Nyxt into this instead of starting from scratch?
        
             | micimize wrote:
             | There are always going to be limitations to extension-based
             | approaches but Firefox with tridactyl is most of the way
             | there capability-wise IMO
             | (https://github.com/tridactyl/tridactyl). I use that plus
             | tree-style tabs and find it excellent. There's always some
             | extensibility limitations that break the integration
             | though, like extensions getting disabled on mozilla
             | domains.
             | 
             | I love projects like nyxt and respect their priorities, but
             | without big-player extension support it's usually a no-go
             | for me. Still, I'll be interested to see the ideas they
             | develop trickle out into the rest of the power-browser
             | ecosystem. I especially like that lossless tree history -
             | history management is a very under-explored UX area IMO
        
               | bovine3dom wrote:
               | You can let extensions run on Mozilla domains by tweaking
               | some settings in about:config [1].
               | 
               | Mozilla believes that it creates a security risk and that
               | you shouldn't do it.
               | 
               | [1]: https://www.ghacks.net/2017/10/27/how-to-enable-
               | firefox-webe...
        
         | hughw wrote:
         | I mean, you're looking at it, but you said it was too much
         | hacker.
        
         | jahsome wrote:
         | Tridactyl checks my boxes.
        
         | PurpleRamen wrote:
         | We basically had this with old Firefox, didn't work out. We
         | kinda have and had this with all the small custom browsers,
         | like Qutebrowser or Nyxt here, doesn't work either.
         | Customizability is a liability, it's work. It comes with many
         | problems, responsibility, work for the users, and not many are
         | willing to take this. Chrome, Firefox and the others are more
         | or less the best we can get regarding balancing customizing,
         | stability, security and user-friendliness.
         | 
         | I mean even in Editor/IDE-Space the popular tools are not the
         | ones who give you the most customizability, but those who give
         | you enough customizing, while not bothering you with the rest,
         | and instead focusing on stable powerful features. Maybe if
         | Coding AI becomes stronger, we can reach this utopia of perfect
         | customizability without all the problems.
        
           | revelio wrote:
           | Maybe? IntelliJ plugin API is pretty much infinite in scope,
           | you can customize nearly anything. Not everything is well
           | documented, mind you.
        
       | userbinator wrote:
       | For those wondering whether this is a new browser engine, the FAQ
       | says:
       | 
       | "Nyxt is web engine agnostic. We utilize a minimal API to
       | interface to any web engine. This makes us flexible and resilient
       | to changes in the web landscape. Currently, we support WebKit and
       | WebEngine (experimental (Blink))."
       | 
       | tl;dr; no. It's just another browser UI, albeit a very different
       | one.
        
       | mtillman wrote:
       | Really cool. Looks like it supports a good mix of emacs and vim
       | bindings.
        
       | beebmam wrote:
       | No support for Windows, really? That's unfortunate.
        
         | throwawayadvsec wrote:
         | what kind of "hacker" use windows as a main OS though?
         | 
         | windows is only for gaming and testing the software you ship
        
           | deafpolygon wrote:
           | What about Windows that makes it unsuitable? In fact, the
           | majority of "hacking" and the proliferation of "hacking
           | culture" over the history has been done on Windows - not any
           | flavor of UNIX like many would have you believe.
           | 
           | Don't gatekeep.
        
             | anthk wrote:
             | You wish. Proper hacking has been done under Unixen and
             | before, MIT with ITS and Lisp. You don't know anything
             | about hacker culture. The cracking one, maybe. Unix and
             | Lisp users run circles on Windows' crappy warez culture any
             | day.
        
             | throwawayadvsec wrote:
             | Windows is good for getting hacked, unix is good for
             | hacking
        
             | akho wrote:
             | What's a "hacking culture"?
        
               | deafpolygon wrote:
               | I did quote it.
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hacker_culture
        
               | akho wrote:
               | I thought you somehow differentiate "hacker" and
               | "hacking", because you are not making sense otherwise.
        
               | anthk wrote:
               | This. Common Lisp and Emacs' hacker/AI/REPL programming
               | world make Windows' cracking culture a running joke.
        
             | xigoi wrote:
             | > What about Windows that makes it unsuitable?
             | 
             | It's proprietary and user-hostile, with things like
             | tracking and forced updates.
        
               | deafpolygon wrote:
               | I agree that aspect is unpalatable for some, but it does
               | not exclude the usefulness of the OS to hack on things
               | with.
        
       | tptacek wrote:
       | Previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28623720
        
       | ainar-g wrote:
       | https://nyxt.atlas.engineer/faq
       | 
       | > Nyxt is a browser with deeply integrated AI and semantic
       | document tools that work as a second brain to help you process
       | and understand more, more quickly.
       | 
       | It'd be nice if they elaborated on what this "integrated A.I."
       | thing actually is in that or another FAQ entry.
        
       | mikl wrote:
       | Nyxt: The Emacs Superfan's Browser
       | 
       | FTFY.
        
       | tortoise_in wrote:
       | Plans to bring on Android?
        
         | mm007emko wrote:
         | Keyboard-driven UI on Android? Well, for the brave and true
         | hackers (if you don't connect a keyboard to your android device
         | which you can ... but why having an android device then?)
        
       | n8henrie wrote:
       | Wasn't this just posted last week? And recently before that as
       | well?
       | 
       | I remember checking it out, being disappointed about its not-
       | great availability for MacOS, and thinking that I should learn
       | lisp.
        
         | slondr wrote:
         | > Wasn't this just posted last week? And recently before that
         | as well?
         | 
         | Yes. Nyxt just had a major 3.0.0 release, and we had a thread
         | about that: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35869378
        
         | mikrl wrote:
         | > thinking that I should learn lisp
         | 
         | There was a programming language taxonomy thread posted a few
         | weeks ago and I seriously think if you want to 'git gud' you
         | should dabble in all of the families.
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35813496
         | 
         | When you see how to implement a REPL in Lisp, it will blow your
         | mind.
        
           | n8henrie wrote:
           | Thanks, I'll check it out!
        
       | Janymos wrote:
       | Really like the idea of a tree-based browsing history. It is more
       | in tune with the graph-traversal nature of browsing the internet,
       | and could be extremely useful for people who conducts extensive
       | reading or research on the internet. Honestly feel like this
       | should be an option for more web browsers as an alternative to
       | the 1D, flat structure of tabs.
        
       | klntsky wrote:
       | No need for a separate browser to do all that - all the features
       | exist as firefox extensions.
        
       | sylware wrote:
       | Still using big tech c++ diareha of webkit(apple) or
       | blink(google).
       | 
       | Please, do acknowledge this is nearly pointless.
       | 
       | Stop coding that please: first thing first, namely code a web
       | engine in a plain and simple language (like C89+ with bits of
       | c99/c11) and not using that any grotesque and absurd language
       | syntax like c++... even though the core of the issue is the web
       | itself.
        
         | friend_and_foe wrote:
         | You can use any engine you want.
        
       | throwawayadvsec wrote:
       | In terms of fingerprinting/bot detection, is it flagged as
       | suspicious/automated browser?
       | 
       | it would be interesting to have a customizable browser for
       | undetectable automation
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | noisy_boy wrote:
       | Since we are on the topic of hackers browsers, does anyone know
       | if Firefox can be made to split pane (both for seeing the same
       | page side by side and also doing it for two different pages)?
       | Having done that with file browsers and IDEs, I wonder how come
       | it wasn't a main feature? Nobody needed to compare pages side by
       | side?
        
         | elashri wrote:
         | Actually the had official extension[1] that did that in the
         | past but I don't remember and can't find why it is no longer
         | available.
         | 
         | [1] https://blog.mozilla.org/en/uncategorized/its-a-new-
         | firefox-...
        
           | easrng wrote:
           | https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/side-view/
        
             | noisy_boy wrote:
             | Thanks - this is useful indeed but it is sort of a hobbled
             | view - I don't have access to the extensions I have
             | installed in the side view. E.g. the main view shows the
             | page in dark mode via dark reader but the side view doesn't
             | have access to the extension so it has white background
             | which is very jarring (better than nothing though). I wish
             | they allowed a full-on split - almost like having two
             | browser windows (with a common menu/bookmarks bar that acts
             | upon the "active" pane).
        
         | dagurp wrote:
         | Vivaldi does this out of the box
        
           | hiatus wrote:
           | So too does Arc.
        
       | IshKebab wrote:
       | > we select and close all buffers
       | 
       | Why would you call tabs "buffers"? It's not a text editor. (And
       | that barely makes sense for a text editor anyway.)
        
         | shrimp_emoji wrote:
         | Oops, I made a yank-pasta error.
         | 
         | With my
         | https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/77/Adm3aima...
         | keyboard
        
       | qwertox wrote:
       | Does it do regex search? I so often need to do a foo|bar in a
       | page.
       | 
       | Back in the days, before Firefox switched to the Google Chrome
       | model of extensions, there used to be a really nice advanced
       | search addon. Nicely integrated into the UI.
        
         | Zetice wrote:
         | I think the whole point is you can add it!
        
         | joshspankit wrote:
         | Another one I constantly wish for: search for numbers between a
         | range
        
           | ivanjermakov wrote:
           | You can do that with vimium: https://github.com/philc/vimium/
           | issues/367#issuecomment-3535...
        
             | skywal_l wrote:
             | TLDR: "Regex support (turned on by the \r escape sequence)"
             | 
             | So, '/' then '\r' and your regex then 'n' or 'shift+n' for
             | next/previous.
        
       | aaron695 wrote:
       | It's not what I expected from their webpage, I think their Github
       | explains it better -
       | 
       | Nyxt [nykst] is a keyboard-driven web browser designed for power
       | users. Inspired by Emacs and Vim, it has familiar keybindings
       | (Emacs, vi, CUA), and is infinitely extensible in Lisp.
       | 
       | It's not for the OSINT community, is how I'd read it.
        
         | bee_rider wrote:
         | Open source intelligence? What's the link, are you speculating
         | that it might be insecure or something?
        
       | yosito wrote:
       | I just want a WebKit-based browser where everything can be
       | controlled by a prominent LLM prompt box. No more clicking
       | through constantly changing menus or trying to remember rarely-
       | used vim shortcuts, just tell it what you want to do. Bonus if it
       | supports continuous voice input.
        
         | dagurp wrote:
         | Use Vivaldi then. Just press F2 and you can type any command in
         | the browser. You can also use it to search your history and
         | bookmarks and do basic arithmetic.
         | 
         | You can also combine commands into so called command chains.
        
       | akomtu wrote:
       | Cool stuff. We all need to escape the oligopoly of Chrome and
       | Safari. Consider making a build for Android and consider
       | inserting a JS polyfill layer that could stub any weird API with
       | an extension, without rebuilding the browser (side effect: it's
       | an ultimate adblock solution).
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-05-20 23:01 UTC)