[HN Gopher] micro - A Modern Alternative to nano
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       micro - A Modern Alternative to nano
        
       Author : mdwalters
       Score  : 322 points
       Date   : 2023-08-18 04:06 UTC (18 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (micro-editor.github.io)
 (TXT) w3m dump (micro-editor.github.io)
        
       | Semaphor wrote:
       | Out of 14 other submissions, 2020 [0] had 103 comments and 2021
       | [1] 162 comments.
       | 
       | [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23334190
       | 
       | [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29128702
        
       | johnklos wrote:
       | micro wants to be a small, lightweight, modern alternative to
       | other things, but it's written in Go, which means it isn't going
       | to be available for older systems and/or for classic
       | architectures.
       | 
       | A good alternative should be usable in a decent number of places
       | where the original is usable :P
        
         | malloc-0x90 wrote:
         | Tilde is faster for bigger files, and it runs and compile
         | everywhere; TextAdept even has code folding.
         | 
         | - https://github.com/gphalkes/tilde
         | 
         | - https://orbitalquark.github.io/textadept/
        
       | MantisShrimp90 wrote:
       | I guess this is for people that don't use Neovim but never want
       | to leave the terminal? Just kinda seems like the worst of both
       | worlds to me. Less powerful than neovim while still using the
       | same configuration language, yet less ubiquitous than even vscode
       | at this point which does have many easy download options.
        
         | cmrdporcupine wrote:
         | What a strange comment, as if everyone wants or needs to use
         | vi...
         | 
         | Believe it or not, _most_ people don 't like or use modal
         | editing and vi-style keybindings. Yes, Vim is extremely
         | popular, but it's still a minority of people who are typing
         | text into computers. The vast majority of people out there are
         | working in editors with "traditional" direct, modeless, editing
         | and some variation of "standard" (aka Windows/Mac) or Emacs-ish
         | keybindings. (Hell, even bash/zsh/readline -- effectively a
         | single line text editor -- ships with a sub-variation of emacs
         | keybindings by default.)
         | 
         | Personally, I use emacs -- when it's available. But something
         | like this looks good for lower footprint systems.
         | 
         | Anyways, what a strange comment. Nano/Pico, etc. have been
         | around since the super early days, I remember using Pico on a
         | 486 back in 1993. Used to be the default editor on most systems
         | that had the 'pine' email client installed, too, which was very
         | common all over the place.
        
           | xp84 wrote:
           | Seriously, the fetish people have for vim and for pushing a
           | modal editor on people who didn't learn on such programs is
           | downright weird. Vim is definitely an insane default editor
           | for anyone who's not already a skilled fan of it. Micro even
           | has mouse support, making the incredibly common task of "put
           | something at a certain place in this config file" trivial,
           | versus vim where you only need to memorize 12 random key
           | bindings to become more efficient at keyboard cursor control
           | than what a 7-year-old can do with a mouse.
           | 
           | I classify vim usage more as a religion than anything else.
           | That doesn't mean I don't respect how effective that 0.5% of
           | developers can be with it, but nearly no one I've met is as
           | efficient in it as they'd be in VSCode, and about 95% are so
           | unskilled in Vim that they get tripped up by just the basic
           | mode switch and remembering :wq. They should not even be
           | bothering with it. But sadly it seems 80% of people think
           | it's mandatory to use it to edit random files on servers, and
           | as the editor for things like git.
        
             | cmrdporcupine wrote:
             | Absolutely it feels disrespectful maybe in the context of
             | Bram Moolenaar's recent passing, but... To me the vim thing
             | is kind of cultish?
             | 
             | I have encountered many gatekeeping-elitists out there who
             | act like this is some kind of entrance exam for competence
             | in our profession or something. It's disturbing.
             | 
             | Early on I went with the emacs religion instead of the vi
             | religion. That merely came down to the fact that my
             | favourite MUD/MOO client was in emacs (it was amazing,
             | BTW). And because emacs was on the HP-UX systems I was
             | playing on. And because the modal editing in vi seemed
             | crude and slow to me.... but in the intervening years I'd
             | never thought of telling anybody around me that _they_
             | should be using emacs or judged them for not using it?
             | 
             | But I've now encountered several people in the last 20
             | years who said things like _" I wouldn't hire somebody who
             | relies on an IDE to write code"_ always along with an
             | aggressive promotion of vim.
             | 
             | Anyways, I think vim is neat. I respect it. But I won't use
             | it... Don't Mode Me In.
        
       | punnerud wrote:
       | On Mac, add it to terminal with brew:
       | 
       | brew install micro
       | 
       | The command on the webpage will only add it to the location you
       | run it.
        
         | linuxdude314 wrote:
         | Thats because wherever you downloaded it isn't in PATH.
         | 
         | If you don't want to use brew and want it available everywhere
         | just set PATH=$PATH:<location of script>
        
       | Roark66 wrote:
       | I'm not sure why do we need one. Nano works fine everywhere.
        
         | mixmastamyk wrote:
         | It has unique keybindings. I used to change them, but don't
         | need to with micro.
        
       | petabytes wrote:
       | Been using it as my main editor for the past 3 years now, coming
       | from Sublime Text. It's been a great editor so far, but it's
       | missing a lot of modern features, and the plugin support seems to
       | be next to none.
        
         | xp84 wrote:
         | I must be weird because I see a major divide in editors. CLI
         | editors are for light text editing and don't need plugins.
         | Updating a line in a config file, etc. I've never even wished
         | for a plug-in for them. IDEs need plugins. They're for coding.
         | 
         | (I know some people use vim or emacs for coding, with 1000
         | amazing plugins, but I think deep down they're masochists in
         | the first place, especially vim.)
        
           | legends2k wrote:
           | I think people who reach for an IDE are deep down spoiled
           | brats who need everything on a platter.
        
         | tipiirai wrote:
         | Why did you leave Sublime?
        
           | dr_kiszonka wrote:
           | I use Sublime daily exclusively for quick notes and as a
           | scratch pad/clipboard. What I have started noticing recently
           | and what worries me is that with only the most basic Markdown
           | plugins it now uses 1 GB of RAM and is somewhat less snappy
           | than it used to. I really hope it goes away soon but with
           | other editors getting more resource-heavy, I am worried.
        
             | manuelmagic wrote:
             | I have tens of files open in ST right now and it's using 16
             | MB of RAM. I'd suggest some tests without the plugins you
             | are describing.
        
               | itsoktocry wrote:
               | > _I 'd suggest some tests without the plugins you are
               | describing._
               | 
               | How is this useful if you want to use those plugins?
        
           | LoganDark wrote:
           | Sublime has syntax highlighting, but no analysis or
           | refactoring features
        
             | Ennea wrote:
             | It has support for LSP, with plugins that integrate the
             | various language servers out there.
        
               | LoganDark wrote:
               | Since when? I can't get Sublime to do anything useful.
               | Have a link?
        
               | Nuzzerino wrote:
               | https://lsp.sublimetext.io/language_servers/
        
         | akho wrote:
         | It's an alternative to nano, not to vsc.
        
       | prmoustache wrote:
       | Micro? really? a 11MB binary?
        
         | kioshix wrote:
         | Seems like a really modern alternative to my 389K nano.
        
           | oytis wrote:
           | Micro should have been 389M then.
        
         | KolenCh wrote:
         | 11 Micro TB
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | daneel_w wrote:
         | Well, it's written in Go, so...
        
         | benhoyt wrote:
         | Yeah, "micro" for an editor would be 11 _kilo_ bytes. I bet it
         | 's possible to do a half-decent editor in C in 11KB. Antirez's
         | "kilo" (~1000 lines of C) is 36KB when compiled with standard
         | gcc (https://github.com/antirez/kilo).
         | 
         | That said, for many server-type use cases these days, 11MB
         | isn't a huge deal. Still, I wonder if micro could be compiled
         | on / ported to TinyGo and end up a few hundred KB? It looks
         | like TinyGo can produce some pretty small binaries:
         | https://tinygo.org/docs/guides/optimizing-binaries/
        
           | prmoustache wrote:
           | >That said, for many server-type use cases these days, 11MB
           | isn't a huge deal.
           | 
           | Yes but that doesn't make it a good candidate for a default
           | editor that would be ubiquitous, from small embedded
           | development stuff to servers to desktop.
           | 
           | I don't mind several MB when the tool offer more than the
           | competition. But what are pico/nano lacking really when it
           | comes to editing a few lines in a config file once in a
           | while? It is not like micro is trying to replace visual
           | studio code or emacs either. Or is it?
        
         | otterpro wrote:
         | Vim on my macbook is 5MB. Perhaps Micro can be optimized for
         | smaller-sized binary?
        
           | prmoustache wrote:
           | On some linux distros (debian based) there is a im-tiny
           | package smaller than the full blown vim.
           | 
           | Also historically vim was not the default vi clone installed,
           | which was an optionnally installed package. The default was
           | very often a smaller clone: elvis. Busybox as its own vi
           | clone and most BSD OS are still providing nvi by default
        
       | stracer wrote:
       | Longer name, harder to type, probably won't catch on.
        
         | seabrookmx wrote:
         | echo 'alias m="micro"' >> ~/.bashrc
        
       | pepa65 wrote:
       | I think nano is modern itself, still actively being developed,
       | and for the past few years more or less feature complete. But if
       | nano wasn't there, I would probably be using micro.
        
         | xp84 wrote:
         | Too many awkward keyboard commands though. To save and quit:
         | ^o, Return, ^x
         | 
         | Vs Micro ^s ^q
         | 
         | Honestly that, and ^k (kill to end of line) are the only
         | commands I use in any CLI editor.
         | 
         | Ironically my muscle memory actually learned the obnoxious
         | 3-step nano way so I usually forget to use micro.
         | 
         | But every time I work with a developer under 40 and see them
         | fiddling with vim trying to wrestle with vim to do simple text
         | entry with a git commit message, I help them set $VISUAL and
         | -$EDITOR to micro, although I have to remember the config to
         | turn on the help/status bar that shows the commands, since they
         | inexplicably turned it off by default a few years ago.
        
           | freeopinion wrote:
           | Whenever I see a developer under 40 struggling to figure out
           | what all the carets on the bottom of the screen mean...
        
           | Jiocus wrote:
           | Are you sure about those nano commands? Since a few years
           | I've always found nano system defaults to be:
           | 
           | ^s: Save
           | 
           | ^o: Save as (type out filename, save and return to editing)
           | 
           | In other words, to save and quit:
           | 
           | ^s,^x
        
       | xuejie wrote:
       | I've been using micro as my main code editor(well I do use vscode
       | for writing coq but that's the only exception) after 10+ years'
       | time with emacs. I simply treat micro as the modern compromised
       | version of acme. It almost has all the features to support the
       | core idea of acme, I have written a plugin to exploit this
       | direction: https://github.com/xxuejie/micro-acme So far it has
       | been working perfectly for me.
        
         | alberth wrote:
         | Knowing nothing about micro, is there a reason why development
         | has slowed down over the last 1-2 years?
         | 
         | https://github.com/zyedidia/micro/tags
        
           | aslilac wrote:
           | because it's a text editor that's already fully capable of
           | editing text. not every thing needs to constantly evolve and
           | add features at a break-neck pace.
        
             | alberth wrote:
             | Emacs, which is ~40 years-old, still regularly has multiple
             | updates per year.
             | 
             | https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/history.html
        
               | fermentation wrote:
               | You can order pizza and get a quote for a mortgage within
               | emacs
        
           | zyedidia wrote:
           | A big reason is because I started a working towards a PhD
           | recently, and so I've been more focused on that. I think
           | micro has also reached a relatively stable spot, where it
           | would only be significantly improved with some large new
           | features. It is serving its purpose well as a simple/familiar
           | terminal-based editor. I have plans to give it more love and
           | release a version 3, but no timeframe.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | cmrdporcupine wrote:
         | I keep trying stripped down terminal editors as alternatives to
         | emacs -- because these days I use like 1% of emacs anyways --
         | but I always severely miss the common emacs major modes for
         | C/C++ etc and especially its approach to indentation there (tab
         | to force correct indent). I really wish other editors would
         | follow this convention.
        
         | antics9 wrote:
         | Same here. Went from Emacs to Acme, while using mg in the
         | terminal. Now I've customised Micro to get that Acme feel.
        
       | aidog wrote:
       | I love micro, I just wish it had a file selector like nerdtree
       | and a shell.
        
       | Borborygymus wrote:
       | Software project name DNA.
       | 
       | MicroEmacs -> Pico -> Nano -> Micro
        
         | einr wrote:
         | PICO is the PIne COmposer -- the editor that came with PINE,
         | the e-mail client.
        
           | Borborygymus wrote:
           | Pico was based on MicroEmacs 3.6. Nano is an open source
           | clone of Pico - there's definite DNA in that series. I'm
           | assuming not in this new Micro, but it's faintly amusing that
           | the name seems to be a play on something that was a play on a
           | name which was a play on a historical namesake of the new
           | thing.
           | 
           | Circles.
        
         | cmrdporcupine wrote:
         | Mildly amusing joke, but, as sibling pointed out, different
         | lineage.
        
       | Narushia wrote:
       | Been using this for years, really great for making quick edits in
       | the terminal. Mouse support and standard editing shortcuts _as
       | the default_ (unlike many other terminal text editors) are the
       | best features in my opinion.
        
         | Geezus_42 wrote:
         | What standard?
        
           | PhasmaFelis wrote:
           | I'm assuming they mean the standard shared by every GUI app
           | in every OS for the last 25 years.
        
             | mixmastamyk wrote:
             | About 40 really. Mac OS and IBM CUA... early to mid 80s.
             | Motif, late 80s.
        
               | PhasmaFelis wrote:
               | True, it's older than that, but I didn't recall exactly
               | when it became universal across all significant
               | contemporary OSes. I don't know what Amiga Workbench
               | used, for example. Figured Win95-era was a conservative
               | guess.
        
               | mixmastamyk wrote:
               | When the IBM PC took over basically, but interestingly
               | they used the Mac as a starting point, since Microsoft
               | had been using the keys. MS learned GUI programming on
               | the Mac before they developed Windows. Hence the lawsuit
               | Apple lost.
               | 
               | Motif/CDE said "good enough" as well. IBM even backported
               | some to its mainframes and minis.
        
           | btbuildem wrote:
           | Guessing the mainstream ctrl-c/ctrl-v as opposed to "two quad
           | key combos while squatting with one foot off the ground"
        
             | [deleted]
        
           | Narushia wrote:
           | I'm not referring to some definite standard, but to the
           | conventions that have existed in most desktop apps, at least
           | on Windows and Linux, ever since I first used a computer.
           | Wikipedia has a good list of them.[1]
           | 
           | The list also shows Emacs and Vim for comparison, so it's
           | easy to see the deviation from the Windows/Linux conventions.
           | 
           | When it comes to text editing specifically, at least these
           | ones are deeply inscribed in my muscle memory, and I use them
           | every day in a variety of applications:
           | 
           | - Ctrl+C: copy selection to clipboard
           | 
           | - Ctrl+V: paste from clipboard
           | 
           | - Ctrl+X: cut selection to clipboard
           | 
           | - Ctrl+Z: undo previous operation
           | 
           | - Ctrl+Y: redo previous operation
           | 
           | - Ctrl+A: select all
           | 
           | - Ctrl+F: find
           | 
           | - Del: delete char to the right of cursor
           | 
           | - Ctrl+Del: delete word to the right of cursor
           | 
           | - Ctrl+Backspace: delete word to the left of cursor
           | 
           | - Home: go to start of line
           | 
           | - End: go to end of line
           | 
           | - Ctrl+Home: go to start of document
           | 
           | - Ctrl+End: go to end of document
           | 
           | - Ctrl+Left: go to previous word
           | 
           | - Ctrl+Right: go to next word
           | 
           | (And the Shift variations for selecting text regions, like
           | Ctrl+Shift+Right for selecting the word right of the cursor.)
           | 
           | I'm definitely not the fastest typer, but I feel these make
           | my text editing a snappy process.
           | 
           | Additionally, while not related to the editing itself, I
           | appreciate these ones:
           | 
           | - Ctrl+S: save document
           | 
           | - Ctrl+Q: quit document
           | 
           | [1]:
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_of_keyboard_shortcuts
        
             | PhasmaFelis wrote:
             | For the record, MacOS substitutes the Command key for Ctrl,
             | but otherwise most of these are the same there, too.
        
       | muxator wrote:
       | The top intuitive to use TUI editors in my heart will always be:
       | - MS Dos Edit - Turbo Pascal 6
       | 
       | Edit felt like a windows application: select with shift+arrows,
       | move fast with ctrl+home/end.
       | 
       | Turbo Pascal's keybindings were a bit influenced by WordStar's, I
       | think, so a bit old style already at the time. But, my friend,
       | the TUI Toolkit, TurboVision! What did they do there! Multiple
       | windows that could be dragged and resized, blazingly fast. All of
       | this on a 486 with megabytes of ram.
       | 
       | I never found any TUI editors like those two.
        
         | richardjam73 wrote:
         | When looking at Freedos a while back I found an editor called
         | setedit. It does work on other platforms than DOS but I haven't
         | tried it. It is influenced by the Borland C++ IDE editor.
         | 
         | https://setedit.sourceforge.net/
        
         | pepa65 wrote:
         | Those are default bindings in nano I think. (I've been using my
         | custom bindings for years...)
        
         | pyrelight wrote:
         | Turbo Pascal's UI was magical and perfect.
        
         | mbork_pl wrote:
         | Right! I also used a Norton Commander clone written with Turbo
         | Vision. You could mark several files (with Insert), then press
         | F4 and voila - you got multiple windows open! AFAIR, you could
         | even do a "global search and replace" (across these windows).
         | Powerful stuff.
         | 
         | Although _coding_ in TV was much, much less pleasant than using
         | it...
         | 
         | Now I use Emacs, which is obviously superior to any other
         | editor except Vim, which is incomparable [0] to Emacs.
         | 
         | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partially_ordered_set
        
         | TylerE wrote:
         | The one I really liked back in the day was Jed. Basically
         | nano/windows style keybindings, but it had stuff like syntax
         | highlighting...in the mid 90s.
        
           | kseistrup wrote:
           | I've been using jed since the 90'es. I've tried many other
           | editors, but I always return to jed.
           | 
           | Should I switch to something else, it would probably be
           | kakoune.
        
         | lloeki wrote:
         | 486? Ha! I remember getting my hands on a TP copy in late 80s
         | early 90s, first version I had fit on a 720k floppy but the
         | second one did not (1.44), and I remember trimming it down to
         | fit 720k because I had only a 640kiB 80c88 with two 3.5" 720k
         | drives and no hard disk. It was plenty fast already!
         | 
         | Then I got a 1MiB 286 Goupil G5 (with something like 20MiB HDD,
         | I remember thinking that thing is so huge how am I ever going
         | to fill that, which I never did) and a colour CRT, TP felt so
         | blink and you miss it fast on that machine already, it must
         | have been lightspeed on a 486!
         | 
         | I for the life of me can't remember if aforementioned versions
         | were (resp.) 4.0 and 5.0 or 5.0 and 6.0 though. My hunch is on
         | the latter but I'm _really_ not sure. Last one I used was TP
         | 7.something much later (early  '00s)
        
           | pjmlp wrote:
           | TP 5.5 was the one that wasn't already fitting into a floppy.
           | 
           | Using MS-DOS 3.3 with TP 4, was still doable on a 1.44MB,
           | which I used to carry around during high school for our
           | computer lab.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | roytam87 wrote:
         | You may give YEdit a try. http://www.malsmith.net/edit/
        
         | pjmlp wrote:
         | TurboVision in TP 6 was my path into OOP, started early on by
         | TP 5.5 adoption of Apple's Object Pascal features.
         | 
         | The framework design is marvelous, not only what it could do on
         | UI level, it already had reflection, serialization, collections
         | with common stuff like map/filter/sort via callbacks.
         | 
         | Great learning experience, and good ramp into "there is more
         | than one way to do OOP".
         | 
         | Another good TUI experience on MS-DOS, also with great OOP
         | ramp-up learnings, Clipper (version 5 introduced OOP support).
        
         | tuatoru wrote:
         | Try tilde editor. It's close-ish.
         | 
         | 1. https://github.com/gphalkes/tilde
        
           | ale42 wrote:
           | Very nice discovery, thanks! Just found it was already on HN,
           | e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34545086
           | 
           | By the way, I noticed a long startup delay... (on tilde, and
           | on micro as well). After some stracing, I found out that the
           | culprit was a TCP connection attempt to an X server that I
           | didn't have. (X forwarding was configured in my SSH client,
           | but there was no X server running on my PC...) In case it can
           | help someone ;)
        
         | acumenical wrote:
         | I've never used micro, but if you look at the default
         | keybindings[0], you'll see they're very Windows-y and might be
         | to your liking.
         | 
         | As for myself, I don't see cut-to-character or select-to-
         | character like in vim, and yanking and pasting seems more
         | intuitive in vim. And with visual block I don't miss Sublime
         | style cursors at all.
         | 
         | 0:
         | https://github.com/zyedidia/micro/blob/master/runtime/help/k...
        
           | boxed wrote:
           | The selection model is unfortunately a bit broken. For
           | example shift+control+arrows and shift+down doesn't work. I
           | believe the problem is that selection with shift isn't
           | written to compose with other navigation.
        
             | neteresy wrote:
             | This is killing me man.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | bharathyes wrote:
             | you need to check your terminal emulator.
             | 
             | just checked the ctrl+thift+arrow keybind, works on
             | alacritty but doesnt on kitty.
        
               | bharathyes wrote:
               | you need to check your terminal emulator.
               | 
               | just checked the ctrl+thift+arrow keybind, works on
               | alacritty but doesnt on kitty.
               | 
               | and shift+up/down works on both
        
             | peterfirefly wrote:
             | Those key combos didn't originally send any special codes
             | to the app. Newer terminal emulators do.
             | 
             | (I once wrote a hack for Linux that opened a connection to
             | the X server and used the xkb -- X Keyboard Extension --
             | protocol to get info about the shift/control/etc state in
             | order to synthesize shift+arrow and shift+control+arrow
             | keycodes. It worked almost perfectly with a local X
             | server.)
        
         | zczc wrote:
         | I think _mcedit_ is close (included with Midnight Commander):
         | similar keybindings, pull-down menu on top, resizable windows
        
         | pavlov wrote:
         | The reason why MS-DOS text editors were so fast and felt
         | powerful is that they used direct access to video memory to
         | render the text-mode UI.
         | 
         | Unix is still stuck on the notion of the console being an
         | output stream that emulates a Teletype printer at some level.
         | Full-screen text UIs work around this by adding extra layers
         | for screen manipulation in a stream-oriented device.
         | 
         | On MS-DOS, the system APIs were so primitive and limited that
         | everybody (beyond basic CLI tools anyway) just wrote directly
         | against the IBM PC hardware, which conveniently mapped the
         | text-mode screen at a memory location. You could print or move
         | or clear on-screen elements using standard memory operations,
         | and there was no other software layer sitting in between
         | translating the frame buffer, so updates were instant. (No
         | other hardware layers either. The CRT blasted out your
         | characters at most some 15 ms after your update. Today, who
         | knows what's buffered in the GPU and display itself.)
         | 
         | It's the difference between a multi-user system where you (as
         | the user) get a narrow stream of I/O with the shared computer
         | vs. a single-user machine where you truly control the device.
         | Sadly the latter model of personal computing is increasingly
         | obsolete.
        
           | magicalhippo wrote:
           | Hence some lovely text mode demos and such. Random
           | example[1].
           | 
           | [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSe5FGlyBFU
        
           | cmrdporcupine wrote:
           | While the 'tty' concept seems archaic, it has served Unix-ish
           | systems very well in the long run, giving us a nice console
           | experience with a diversity of terminal applications and an
           | excellent remote experience.
           | 
           | Meanwhile Windows never really implemented a proper universal
           | console abstraction -- until recently -- and forced all
           | console output through the same terrible hardcoded terminal
           | with crap support for basic things like copy and paste, and
           | struggled for over two decades to have a productive console
           | environment, forcing administrators and power users to do
           | _everything_ of substance through the GUI or tear their hair
           | out. This is finally fixed, but only recently.
        
       | matteoraso wrote:
       | As an unironic GNU nano power user, I feel like this project is
       | for people who want to like GNU nano but don't know how powerful
       | the editor really is. Seriously, I highly recommend everybody to
       | sit down with GNU nano and read the manual. There's a lot that
       | you can do, almost as much as Vim in fact.
        
       | m0rissette wrote:
       | Vim is all you need.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | hungryforcodes wrote:
       | I understand there are alot of command line junkies here which
       | might be against it -- but what's wrong with Tilde? (1)
       | 
       | 1. https://github.com/gphalkes/tilde
        
         | BitFlogger wrote:
         | Looks like it doesn't support MacOSX...
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | molticrystal wrote:
       | Another small TUI ide/editor to try is Orbiton [0] also written
       | in go and has clang-lint, compiling, and has gdb debugging
       | support, though I believe it lacks plugins. These features work
       | also for Rust, C/C++, and I would imagine Zig, and Go development
       | as well. I tested it on an old 2012 kindle fire and it works
       | great.
       | 
       | [0] https://github.com/xyproto/orbiton
        
       | chromoblob wrote:
       | > it's just a static binary with no dependencies
       | 
       | Okay, how does it decide which color escape sequence to output?
       | Does it have an inbuilt terminal database?
        
       | gabrielgio wrote:
       | Why is there still software asking user to run sudo on something
       | downloaded from the internet? Why even bother doing that script
       | if there is a easier, safer, with smaller footprint and built-in
       | in all distro option available?
       | 
       | Just as comparison, micro alpine's package has 4MB (installed)
       | while its staticly compiled binary version it downloads from
       | github has 11MB. The repo's package would make it more micro.
        
         | johnklos wrote:
         | Hear, hear!
         | 
         | It is completely irresponsible to encourage piping random
         | Internet sources to sudo or to (ba)sh, and I'm quite tired of
         | hearing the ridiculous justification that "everyone does it".
        
           | beeburrt wrote:
           | So these are all a bad way of installing?
           | 
           | https://bun.sh/
           | 
           | https://www.rust-lang.org/tools/install
           | 
           | https://deno.land/manual@v1.36.1/getting_started/installatio.
           | ..
           | 
           | I'm not disagreeing with you, as a beginner, I'm just trying
           | to learn.
        
           | jamespo wrote:
           | do you read the script sections of all the packages you
           | install?
        
             | johnklos wrote:
             | Yes, or I get my packages through a trusted package system,
             | such as pkgsrc.
        
             | oneshtein wrote:
             | In Linux, to install virus or malware, you need to
             | download, compile, and install virus manually, OR user can
             | install it using `curl ... | bash`, which is much simpler
             | method. Even newbies can install new malware using `curl
             | ... | bash`.
        
             | gabrielgio wrote:
             | No, it is unfeasible (at least for me) to validate every
             | single package. So at some point I have to trust someone/
             | some party and I chose to trust more the maintainers of my
             | distro than a person asking me to run sudo from curl.
        
               | codedokode wrote:
               | You do not need to trust anyone if the program is run
               | inside a sandbox. This sandbox is supported in hardware
               | since 80386, but Linux doesn't make proper use of it.
        
               | Joker_vD wrote:
               | And some people trust the software authors more than some
               | random repo maintainers who don't have enough time to
               | even make sure the packages they update are actually
               | still compatible with each other.
        
           | notnmeyer wrote:
           | sudo, yes. piping to a shell is fine imo provided the install
           | script is easy enough to read if you are so inclined. i have
           | seen lots of generated install scripts that are mind
           | boggling.
           | 
           | the reality is that you run code you haven't personally read
           | and vetted everyday. so the idea that you need some stranger
           | to bless a package for you to be trustworthy doesn't make a
           | whole lot of sense.
        
         | Karellen wrote:
         | > Why is there still software asking user to run sudo on
         | something downloaded from the internet?
         | 
         | Does it do this?
         | 
         | From https://github.com/zyedidia/micro#quick-install-script
         | Quick-install script              curl https://getmic.ro | bash
         | The script will place the micro binary in the current
         | directory.         From there, you can move it to a directory
         | on your path of your choosing         (e.g. `sudo mv micro
         | /usr/bin`).
         | 
         | It points out you need `sudo` to move the binary to `/usr/bin`
         | - _if_ that 's even what you want to do - but... yeah? So?
        
           | gabrielgio wrote:
           | It says when you run the installer:                   Note
           | that you must install micro to a directory accessible to all
           | users when doing         this, typically /usr/bin. cd to that
           | directory before running this script.                  E.g.:
           | $ cd /usr/bin           $ curl https://getmic.ro/r | sudo sh
           | or                    $ su - root -c "cd /usr/bin; wget -O-
           | https://getmic.ro | GETMICRO_REGISTER=y sh"
        
             | Karellen wrote:
             | You conveniently missed off the lines of text above that
             | which explain what "doing this" is:
             | getmicro can use update-alternatives to register micro as a
             | system text editor.         For example, this will allow
             | `crontab -e` open the cron file with micro.              To
             | enable this feature, define the GETMICRO_REGISTER variable
             | or use the URL         `https://getmic.ro/r`.
             | Note that you must install micro to a directory accessible
             | to all users when doing this...
             | 
             | Yes, if you want to install `micro` as a system text
             | editor, something you _can_ do (but don 't have to), you
             | need privs.
             | 
             | Again, so?
        
               | gabrielgio wrote:
               | I know why it is asking for sudo and that was not my
               | point.
               | 
               | Again, my point is: you should never ask the user to run
               | sudo from curl (or actually, don't curl to bash at all).
               | There are plenty ways to sploit that. Again, I know it
               | needs root to move the bin to a root owned folder or
               | update the default editor, but, again, you should never
               | ask (or suggest) the user to pipe shit from the internet,
               | it is security risk.
               | 
               | Also there is not even reason for it, micro is available
               | in every distro.
        
           | codedokode wrote:
           | This is just a demonstration of how unfriendly is Linux to
           | supporting third-party software. You are supposed either to
           | use software from distribution's repository or compile it
           | yourself. And if you are a software developer, then you are
           | on your own to decide how to support hundreds of different
           | distributions (the most popular way is to statically compile
           | everything into a single binary).
           | 
           | Such scripts remind me of DOS-era "installers", and they are
           | awful:
           | 
           | - it is unknown whether your distribution is supported or not
           | 
           | - this script is probably not tested on many distributions
           | and can break something
           | 
           | - it is unsafe, because you are running a code that some
           | random person posted on the Internet without any sandboxing
        
             | gabrielgio wrote:
             | No, it is not a demonstration of anything. I'm not saying
             | there is no fragmentation on linux, there is.
             | 
             | There are many solution that try to fix that: appimage,
             | flatpak, snap and what not. All of them of some degree of
             | success, and pitfalls. I, for example, am happy user of
             | flapak, running steam games on a alpine distro without much
             | problems.
             | 
             | But for this specific thing I just don't get why there is a
             | curl/bash command. It is a wide available piece of software
             | that you can easily install using distro's repo. Don't want
             | to user terminal? Just download any "mainstream" distro and
             | will have a store like software available, type micro,
             | click install and done.
             | 
             | Is there fragmentation in linux? Yes. Is is hard to
             | guarantee it will work on every distro? Yes, a lot worse on
             | software you can't compile. But micro IS NOT the
             | demonstration of it.
             | 
             | There is no reason whatsoever micro should have "curl |
             | bash" on the front page.
        
         | diego_sandoval wrote:
         | Personally, I don't want a middleman to be inserted between the
         | application developer and me.
         | 
         | I want to get my applications directly from the application
         | developer, because that way I can make sure that I'm using the
         | officially supported version of the app and that no one has
         | meddled with the code.
         | 
         | If I don't trust the application developer, I simply don't
         | install the application.
        
           | gabrielgio wrote:
           | > because that way I can make sure that I'm using the
           | officially supported version
           | 
           | No, they (the developers) can't guarantee that, nor is their
           | job.
           | 
           | You would trust them to develop a reliable software and you
           | would trust the maintainer to guarantee the it will be
           | properly compiled for specific OS version, has the proper
           | permission set and has all dependencies it requires to run.
           | 
           | To ask the software developer to pack and make sure it works
           | for all distribution would be huge amount of work that is
           | beyond their knowledge (which it is not a issue). Also it
           | seems one is not aware how to properly do it when they comes
           | up with a not so bright ideas like the "curl | bash".
           | 
           | It is not you don't trust the developer, it is that there are
           | people who know how to better distribute it.
           | 
           | obs.: this is in the context of micro and general FOSS that
           | is easily available and distributable.
        
       | omgmajk wrote:
       | I've been using Micro for quite some time, with some
       | configuration and addons it becomes very comfy and it's enough
       | for me most of the time. I miss some features though but they are
       | probably more of addons than core features.
        
       | angg wrote:
       | .
        
       | littlestymaar wrote:
       | How can it be modern if it's not even written in Rust /s
        
         | oneshtein wrote:
         | > Rust
         | 
         | https://github.com/ahmednooor/lino
         | 
         | https://github.com/curlpipe/ox
         | 
         | https://github.com/zee-editor/zee
         | 
         | https://github.com/ilai-deutel/kibi
         | 
         | https://github.com/gchp/iota
        
       | moffkalast wrote:
       | This is not a nano alternative, it follows the vim paradigm of
       | having a command mode that nano does not have (for good reasons).
       | It's more of a merge between vim and nano if anything, breaking
       | the core intention behind nano.
       | 
       | If you ask me, nano has a niche of a super simple terminal editor
       | that anyone can look at for the very first time and instantly
       | figure out, with very few pitfalls or ways to mess up. The more
       | features you add, the more modes and options, the easier it is
       | for newcomers to press a key combo that puts them in a state only
       | intended for power users that they won't be able to get out of
       | without googling.
        
         | cmrdporcupine wrote:
         | I guess my main complaint about nano has always been that it
         | seems more suited for document editing rather than code --
         | defaults to word-wrap on, doesn't really have syntax
         | highlighting by default, not a lot of support for code-oriented
         | workflow.
         | 
         | Fine for writing up an email or commit message, I guess, but
         | then I have to have another editor to write code in anyways?
         | 
         | After 30 years of using emacs (well, these days a lot of CLion,
         | too, let's call me a backsliding emacs user) I'm ready for an
         | alternative. But nobody has come along with something that
         | really fits the same swiss army knife niche.
        
           | moffkalast wrote:
           | Well in my experience I very rarely if ever need to actually
           | code in a terminal. Sftp or rsync are usually on hand so
           | there's little reason to not just go for sublime or vscode if
           | I need to make a substantial change. What nano comes in handy
           | for is changing config files and adjusting system settings,
           | when I'm jumping around and making very small edits.
        
             | linuxdude314 wrote:
             | Agree 100%. This is the way (or use SCP).
        
           | linuxdude314 wrote:
           | Writing code in nano is so asinine and such a huge red flag.
        
         | quickthrower2 wrote:
         | https://itsthedatastupid.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/nomodes...
        
       | kevinlinxc wrote:
       | One nit: can't enlarge the carousel of images on mobile
        
       | mpsprd wrote:
       | I wonder, who is this for?
       | 
       | I feel this kind of editor is for the sophisticated minimalist,
       | used alongside a 60% fancy keyboard with ceramic key caps.
       | 
       | I see comments about this being good for "beginners", and I
       | wonder what definition they are using. Make them use a basic
       | graphical editor like gedit.
        
         | linuxdude314 wrote:
         | Nano is not a powerful text editor and is generally only used
         | by non sophisticated users.
        
           | neutrono wrote:
           | What is nano lacking in power?
        
         | pie_flavor wrote:
         | I use VS Code, but I don't use it for $EDITOR, because CLI
         | programs popping up GUI windows always feels icky to me (and
         | it's gotten orphaned once or twice). micro is a really great
         | editor for people who don't use terminal editors for much.
        
           | peferron wrote:
           | I'm not on VS Code but I use micro as $EDITOR for the exact
           | same reasons and it's great. I don't have to remember special
           | shortcuts just to amend a git message or do an interactive
           | rebase.
        
           | mpsprd wrote:
           | Ok I see. Its $EDITOR for people that dislike modal editors.
        
         | Narushia wrote:
         | It is for me, who
         | 
         | - sometimes needs to make a few quick edits right from the
         | terminal (but prefers a proper GUI text editor like VS Code for
         | longer sessions)
         | 
         | - is accustomed to the keyboard shortcut conventions of desktop
         | applications on Linux/Windows[1]
         | 
         | - occasionally, wants to use the mouse and expects it to work
         | in the terminal like it would in a proper GUI text editor.
         | 
         | Micro fulfills all these needs with its default configuration.
         | It is one of the first things I install on a Linux box, be it a
         | desktop or a server.
         | 
         | [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_of_keyboard_shortcuts
        
       | NayamAmarshe wrote:
       | I love micro! Super simple to use and very intuitive.
        
       | teddyh wrote:
       | In those rare cases where Emacs is too large, I use Zile.
        
       | satvikpendem wrote:
       | Shall we just use ed instead?
        
         | quickthrower2 wrote:
         | No because I want to leave on time
        
       | berkeleynerd wrote:
       | I love micro and use it every day. Now that I've tried Helix,
       | however, I want micro plus baked-in treesitter, LSP, and
       | contextual help. Helix really nails it with that feature set but
       | I'm just too happy with my "single-mode + commands" ctrl-c/ctrl-v
       | muscle memory to switch.
        
         | notnmeyer wrote:
         | i've been daily driving helix for 6 months or so. the fact
         | that's it's batteries included is so nice. great editor.
        
       | globular-toast wrote:
       | Just curious, why are people interested in small editors like
       | this? The only reason I ever use vi/vim is because it's
       | everywhere. If I'm going to install an editor, I'll install
       | Emacs. If it's a remote system I'll simply open the file over SSH
       | with tramp (essentially transparently supports remote editing)
       | and retain the full power and speed of my local Emacs. For TUI
       | editing (like for sudoedit, git commit, C-x C-e etc.) I run Emacs
       | as a daemon so new frames, including TUI frames load instantly,
       | look very close to my Emacs GUI (with nerd fonts, colours and
       | everything) and are literally Emacs. You really don't need to
       | have multiple editors for different use cases.
        
         | eternityforest wrote:
         | Nano is on all the OSes I ever encounter. I don't edit things
         | remotely often and it's usually trivial config files.
         | 
         | I tried micro, and liked it but it didn't quite open instantly
         | on a pi and I don't use CLI editors for anything big enough to
         | really need the features.
        
         | oytis wrote:
         | vim vs emacs is an age-old flamewar. I for one was never able
         | to make use of emacs, it feels like a whole new hobby or job to
         | configure it. Vim on the contrary is pretty convenient to use
         | on default settings.
        
         | OfSanguineFire wrote:
         | I have been a Linux nerd for over two decades, but I never
         | managed to grok vi, it just seems unintuitive. I found Emacs
         | more attractive, and when I ssh into a low-powered device like
         | a router running OpenWRT, Emacs isn't available so I use the
         | editor that is available and seems intuitive: Nano. (Yes, I
         | know I could also use Emacs with TRAMP, but everyone
         | establishes their own personal workflow.)
         | 
         | This comment isn't meant to knock vi. Obviously it has its
         | fans. But the inability of some hackers to feel comfortable
         | with it is a well-known phenomenon.
        
           | linuxdude314 wrote:
           | Have you ever sat down for an hour and tried to learn?
           | 
           | If you're familiar with Unix tools a lot of the syntax should
           | be familiar (like string substitutions).
           | 
           | Having been a math tutor in the past, I pretty firmly believe
           | anyone is capable of learning the basics of how to use vim.
           | 
           | It's either a lack of effort or a learning disability, not
           | much in between.
           | 
           | It's really not hard to memorize a few keyboard shortcuts for
           | most people who are proficient with computers.
        
             | seabrookmx wrote:
             | Just because you can doesn't mean you want to. There's
             | alternatives.. if OP doesn't like vi's bindings why would
             | you insinuate they're lazy or have a learning disability?
             | 
             | For my 2c, I did invest the time and know my way around vim
             | fairly well. I still prefer micro.
        
         | Terretta wrote:
         | > _interested in small editors like this_
         | 
         | Not really interested in small editors like _this_.
         | 
         | Very interested in small editors like* nano, for this root
         | comment reason:
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37173126
         | 
         | See also the opening paragraph here:
         | 
         | https://linuxize.com/post/how-to-use-nano-text-editor/
         | 
         | It's courteous to ensure nano in cattle builds for today's
         | sysadmins that didn't grow up with vi or vim or pick the emacs
         | side of that debate.
        
           | globular-toast wrote:
           | Nano is pretty decent for that reason and I definitely
           | wouldn't grumble at having to use it for tiny tasks like a
           | few lines of config file. Including nano (or any editor)
           | inside cattle doesn't seem like it should be necessary,
           | though. If you can open a shell then you should be able to
           | use tramp or something similar.
        
         | thargor90 wrote:
         | We use micro because we could develop a custom plugin without
         | too much effort and it is very easy to deploy (copy) to systems
         | that have no good terminal editor available.
         | 
         | Prefer vim usually, but it's too much effort to deploy a sane
         | configuration to our target systems.
        
         | mixmastamyk wrote:
         | Not everyone is interested in a humongous editor with a steep
         | learning curve. Some people just want to quickly _edit_ a file.
         | 
         | You can use this with the knowledge you have already of windows
         | notepad or mac simpletext and it will work on a busted or
         | server machine with only a unix console.
        
           | globular-toast wrote:
           | It's funny because `emacs -Q -nw` loads instantly on my very
           | modest system and supports pretty much everything `nano` does
           | immediately. You can move around with arrows, you can just
           | start typing etc.
           | 
           | The one thing it's missing is telling you how to save and
           | close the file etc... Makes me wonder if a nano-style help
           | bar with super-simple key bindings would be a useful default
           | bundle for Emacs.
           | 
           | `emacs -Q` seems to load even faster, somehow, and that's the
           | full graphical version if you have a window system.
        
           | KnobbleMcKnees wrote:
           | It also works where you don't have ssh to tunnel files, which
           | is true for many servers in many professional environments.
        
           | tasogare wrote:
           | > Not everyone is interested in a humongous editor with a
           | steep learning
           | 
           | Then why using a TUI editor at all? Each time nano was opened
           | because of some default settings, I saw this whole bottom bar
           | with shortcuts. It sure doesn't seems to be easy to learn
           | either.
        
             | nicoburns wrote:
             | I use micro as git commit/rebase editor. It's handy to be
             | able to do multiline commit messages and interactive
             | rebases without leaving the terminal.
        
             | linuxdude314 wrote:
             | I don't understand why so many people in these comments are
             | claiming text editors are "hard" to learn.
             | 
             | Software engineers that went to college have taken
             | Calculus, Physics, and other advanced courses that can be
             | very hard for many to learn.
             | 
             | The reality is that memorizing a few keyboard shortcuts is
             | not in fact hard. It's something that can take time, and
             | you might not like the shortcuts, but it's not hard.
             | 
             | If you want to use powerful tools, you're going to have to
             | learn how to use them. There's no way around this.
        
               | mixmastamyk wrote:
               | You're in the wrong thread. Normal folks outnumber
               | developers 100 to 1.
               | 
               | Not to mention, some of that dev group prefer that their
               | small editor have the same keybindings as their full dev
               | environment and entire OS for that matter. No mode
               | switching needed.
        
             | Terretta wrote:
             | > _I saw this whole bottom bar with shortcuts. It sure
             | doesn 't seems to be easy_
             | 
             | Sounds easier than _not_ seeing a bottom bar with
             | shortcuts.
        
             | mixmastamyk wrote:
             | Why not? Usually it's because you don't have a GUI
             | available. But also great for a quick edit with sudo.
             | Ctrl+S, Ctrl+Q FTW.
        
       | Aloha wrote:
       | While this is very nice, the lack of Control-A/Control-E support
       | to jump around a line is annoying.
        
         | neutrono wrote:
         | One can always use Home and End in that case.
        
         | mypetocean wrote:
         | On the other hand, Micro supports the Ctrl-based text nav/manip
         | hotkeys (such as Ctrl-arrow, Ctrl-Backspace, CTRL-Home/End,
         | also optionally combined with Shift for selection).
         | 
         | More of a DOS-origin set of hotkeys than GNU. So more familiar
         | to some and less familiar to others.
         | 
         | It supports mouse interaction out-of-the-box, which is a big
         | plus for some folks who haven't spent much time in keyboard
         | navigation. The escape hatch is a nice option for some tasks,
         | even for keyboard navigation pros.
        
       | mixmastamyk wrote:
       | micro is a great compliment to other CUA editors. One set of
       | keybindings to rule them all!
        
       | wener wrote:
       | I add nano to every alpine base container, micro seems good, but
       | apk add nano  # Installed size 308 kB         apk add micro #
       | Installed size 12.17 MB
        
       | kasperset wrote:
       | Reminds me of mg editor
       | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mg_(text_editor) It is a very
       | small subset of EMacs and barely any features compare to micro.
        
       | swozey wrote:
       | I had no idea people used nano as their main code editor. I use
       | it on any nix server I'm working on and have probably used it
       | tens of thousands of times.
       | 
       | I'd been a linux/bsd engineer forever and I worked at some places
       | where they refused to install nano on servers. There are some
       | greybeard linux admins who absolutely refuse to let someone use
       | anything other than vi. I never got that. It's a 20MB package and
       | not exactly much of an attack vector.
        
         | poutinepapi wrote:
         | Greybeards are going to greybeard mate. Plus, it's always funny
         | to me because a lot of the old crowd you ask them what kind of
         | system they ran and they(with swagger) admit that they were in
         | charge of the WHOOOOLE IT department for their local
         | government, and it was a big town too, so at least 500 users.
         | 
         | And I 105% assure that that system was the most secure in the
         | entire county... And also unusable. And when that lad retires
         | or someone in their office kills them out of sheer desperation,
         | hopefully they'll be replaced by one of these new fangled
         | engineers who might not know about vi, but they at least care a
         | little bit about their users(Not a lot though, we're still
         | engineers)
        
           | catiopatio wrote:
           | You could have learned enough vim to be usable in the time it
           | took to write that comment.
        
             | codedokode wrote:
             | How to quit Vim and install Sublime Text?
        
               | speedgoose wrote:
               | You can try Ctrl+C. Vim will of course not exit but
               | display instructions about how to exit.
        
               | rascul wrote:
               | > How to quit Vim
               | 
               | Restart the computer
        
               | cristifalcas wrote:
               | Silly you... It's Ctrl+Z
        
             | GoblinSlayer wrote:
             | Can I? I opened https://www.vim.org/docs.php but something
             | bad happened to it and it displays in microscopic font for
             | me.
             | 
             | After an hour wading through the docs I found a mention of
             | evim:
             | 
             | ---
             | 
             | This manual is about using Vim in the normal way. There is
             | an alternative called "evim" (easy Vim). This is still Vim,
             | but used in a way that resembles a click-and-type editor
             | like Notepad. It always stays in Insert mode, thus it feels
             | very different. It is not explained in the user manual,
             | since it should be mostly self explanatory. See |evim-keys|
             | for details.
             | 
             | ---
             | 
             | That's what you mean?
        
               | swozey wrote:
               | I don't know how much you actually care, and I'm the nano
               | OP of this comment chain/thread but there are some vims
               | (and emacs) with plugins and what not built in. Only one
               | I can think of off the top of my head is
               | https://spacevim.org/ but theres a bunch.
               | 
               | If you are interested they might give you a good start.
        
             | linuxdude314 wrote:
             | Agreed. Nano use is somewhat of a red flag to me.
             | 
             | It's SO inefficient in comparison to Vim, VSCode, or tons
             | of other alternatives.
             | 
             | If it's the only thing on the box, fine, but in reality
             | usually Vim is the only editor installed.
        
               | swozey wrote:
               | I initially thought you were speaking of CPU/ram
               | efficiency until you threw in vscode, so I think you mean
               | developer efficiency. Vi/vim is what _you 're_ accustomed
               | to. I've worked with nano since it came out, I think
               | 2004-5ish. I have no idea what I used prior to that,
               | probably vi.
               | 
               | But I am MUCH faster and more efficient with nano than I
               | am vi/vim/emacs. My text editor of choice is like my IDE
               | of choice, it shouldn't be a problem at all for anyone to
               | just accept that I'm getting my work done in a different
               | application.
        
         | cesarb wrote:
         | > There are some greybeard linux admins who absolutely refuse
         | to let someone use anything other than vi. I never got that.
         | 
         | When I first encountered nano, I found out that it could
         | silently corrupt configuration files (by word wrapping long
         | lines) unless you were very careful to _always_ start it as
         | "nano -w". Since then, I've always removed nano (or at least
         | set something else as the default editor) on every Unix system
         | I administer.
        
           | zamadatix wrote:
           | "-w" changes visual wrapping, it doesn't save that way. No
           | different than the behavior of "cat" in an interactive
           | terminal really, beyond the temptation for editor religion.
           | 
           | There is the .nanorc option to do e.g. "setfill 80" and "set
           | breaklines" but that's no different than setting a "tw=80"
           | type config in your vimrc and saying vim breaks config files.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | cesarb wrote:
             | > "-w" changes visual wrapping, it doesn't save that way.
             | No different than the behavior of "cat" in an interactive
             | terminal really, beyond the temptation for editor religion.
             | 
             | What you mentioned is "soft wrapping", which is visual only
             | but doesn't affect the saved file. But the default for nano
             | when I first encountered it was "hard wrapping", which does
             | affect the saved file. Some distributions later changed the
             | default in the nano configuration file, but depending on
             | the configuration file instead of a built-in default is
             | risky. See https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-
             | bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=135978 (and the five other bug
             | reports merged into it) for an example of the problems
             | caused by running nano in the default configuration without
             | disabling its line wrapping.
        
               | zamadatix wrote:
               | I stand corrected on the wrap behavior of the original
               | nano 1.x. Softwrap and the default wrap mode change
               | weren't added until later.
        
               | swozey wrote:
               | That's interesting. I haven't ever had that problem. I
               | have had a ton of problems with zsh adding characters to
               | things like SSL certs (I forgot, maybe an ending %?)
               | where I had to switch back to bash to base64
               | encode/decode it properly.
               | 
               | I write the standards for our engineers to
               | follow/emulate/consider. I don't have very much for nano
               | but this is what I put into every containers userdata
               | scripts. I can't get this curl command to show up
               | correctly.                 # Add syntax highlighting and
               | line numbers to nanorc, need to fork syntax repo so we're
               | not installing random git repos            curl
               | 
               | https://raw.githubusercontent.com/scopatz/nanorc/master/i
               | nst... | sh                 {       echo set constantshow
               | echo set linenumbers       } > ~/.nanorc
        
           | rascul wrote:
           | If I recall correctly that default changed awhile back. One
           | could also set it how they want in nanorc.
           | 
           | However, I do understand the criticism, and how that could
           | leave a bad first impression.
        
         | notnmeyer wrote:
         | pretty much madness. it's almost like a badge of honor for some
         | folks.
        
         | vdfs wrote:
         | 20MB? just check nano executable and it's 277KB, the whole .deb
         | packages is 860 kB
         | 
         | https://packages.ubuntu.com/jammy/nano
        
           | xyproto wrote:
           | gccgo + upx can reduce the size of Go executables
           | considerably, usually below 1M.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | makapuf wrote:
             | note that it does not reduce the memory size once loaded
             | (and even prevents sharing pages when several instances are
             | run since memory is written when decompressed, not read as
             | a program binary is)
        
               | londons_explore wrote:
               | > even prevents sharing pages when several instances are
               | run since memory is written when decompressed, not read
               | as a program binary
               | 
               | A shame the linux kernel doesn't have some way for
               | packers to say "I am a packer, I run with access to
               | nothing except the binary, therefore run me with no
               | permissions and then share the pages I make with any user
               | that executes me. If you like, you can even delete my
               | output and reunpack me on-demand"
        
               | xyproto wrote:
               | That would be something!
        
           | swozey wrote:
           | I thought 20MB was a lot.
           | 
           | I did "nano debian size" on google and one of them mentions -
           | The Nano package contains a small, simple text editor which
           | aims to replace Pico, ... Download size: 1.5 MB. Estimated
           | disk space required: 20 MB.
           | 
           | https://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/svn/postlfs/nano..
           | ..
        
             | vdfs wrote:
             | That's not true for Debian either:
             | 
             | https://packages.debian.org/bullseye/nano
             | 
             | But building from source is a different story, if you
             | stripe and clean build dir it will be similar to prebuilt
             | .deb
        
         | JohnFen wrote:
         | Personally, I strongly dislike nano and will take vi any day of
         | the week over it.
         | 
         | However, the choice of text editor is a very personal one. It
         | makes no sense at all for anyone to insist that anyone else
         | should or shouldn't use any particular text editor. Just let
         | people use what they like.
        
         | kunwon1 wrote:
         | I was a nano user, and this happened to me. I got greybearded
         | into vim, and now I only touch nano when I need to de-crappify
         | a vimrc file
         | 
         | I was mad about it at the time, but now I'm happy I made the
         | change. Vim or vi is everywhere, including on the switches and
         | routers I work on. Nano is not everywhere, nor can it easily be
         | put everywhere.
         | 
         | If I weren't regularly SSHing into decrepit or resource-
         | constrained hardware, I would likely see less of a benefit
        
           | swozey wrote:
           | I don't know why, probably terrible memory, but I have
           | practically a mental block when it comes to keyboard
           | shortcuts. I've tried spacevim and a few other bundled vims
           | before but I have such a hard time doing anything other than
           | moving the cursor and :wq! type of stuff.
           | 
           | Like.. this is wild https://vim.rtorr.com/
           | 
           | And now I'm hooked on a horrible amount of vscode plugins.
        
             | naikrovek wrote:
             | you can do it. you have to _want to_ , first, though.
             | 
             | then you sit down for an hour and you create and edit a
             | file, and you do not allow yourself to hold any key down to
             | move the cursor around. you have the link you posted
             | printed out, and you use only what is on the sheet to edit.
             | 
             | when you want to add something to the end of the line, you
             | do NOT push the END key then enter edit mode, you look at
             | the sheet and you find what you want and you push SHIFT+A
             | to enter edit mode and go to the end of the line at the
             | same time.
             | 
             | you keep track of which mode you're in and what mode you
             | need to do something, and you force yourself through the
             | keystrokes needed to operate completely and efficiently
             | using only the keyboard.
             | 
             | in an hour, if you force yourself to use only the shortcuts
             | on the cheat sheet, you will be more fluent in vi/vim than
             | ~90% of the people who use it, myself included, and I've
             | been using vi/vim for 25 years.
        
             | linuxdude314 wrote:
             | You might like x!
        
           | tuxychandru wrote:
           | > now I only touch nano when I need to de-crappify a vimrc
           | file
           | 
           | You can start vim with --clean to fix your vimrc.
        
           | linuxdude314 wrote:
           | You make some excellent points. Unfortunately most hardware
           | at some point ends up in this state.
        
         | un1xl0ser wrote:
         | The main reason to know vi inside and out as a Unix
         | administrator has to do with it being the lowest common
         | denominator on Unix and Linux systems.
         | 
         | As a *nix tech I could get a call to work on a QNX system, HP-
         | UX system, SGI Altix supercomputer or a Sun Ultra 2. Linux
         | systems were easy, as they had the package management support
         | for FL/OSS, and would commonly come with Emacs in the base-pack
         | (before nano was mainstream). Sometimes you would have a
         | terminal issue and have a single line to work with, in which
         | case you would need to operate vi without seeing what you are
         | doing (or use sed/awk). So maybe it is those instincts to KISS
         | and force everyone to learn vi, like they had to (I had to).
         | 
         | Certainly it provides no significant surface area of attack to
         | have an editor, but I wouldn't put it past a threat actor to
         | leverage plugin functionality as a persistence mechanism. I
         | presume that these applications operate differently as root,
         | but maybe not as service (daemon) accounts. It's not very well
         | hidden, but there are all grades of threat actors.
        
         | junaru wrote:
         | Haven't tried removing nano ever but hate it with a passion for
         | one simple reason.
         | 
         | If none of the EDITOR/VISUAL/etc. variables are set when you
         | invoke 'visudo' a f*king nano appears.
         | 
         | Like god dammit it i assume vi in that name comes from vi as
         | even the manpage has 'vi' among 'see also'. This is akin to
         | launching firefox and some random application popping up - its
         | the ultimate troll and i salute your graybeards for solving the
         | problem at the core!
        
           | zwog wrote:
           | That is OS dependent, though. On Arch Linux with EDITOR empty
           | `visudo` opens vi.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | dormento wrote:
         | 20MB is bigger than some whole GNU/Linux systems I installed in
         | the past. Might explain why the greybeard council disapproves
         | of it.
        
           | swozey wrote:
           | You made me curious. I started w/ openBSD 1.2 in '95. I can't
           | find it anywhere though to see what size it was.
        
             | rascul wrote:
             | There were some Linux distros in decades past designed to
             | run off of a couple floppies. I struggle to recall any
             | names at the moment.
        
               | kunwon1 wrote:
               | In 2005 I worked for a small radio shop. Firewall was
               | running Coyote Linux, which booted off a single 3.5"
               | floppy with write protect switched on.
        
               | cesarb wrote:
               | The classic one was "tomsrtbt" (http://www.toms.net/rb/).
        
               | swozey wrote:
               | His homepage just brought me SO much nostalgia. Just
               | needs spinning skulls and construction gifs.
               | http://www.toms.net/
               | 
               | And dang he owns toms.net, nice.
               | 
               | His resume on here hasn't been updated since 2002. Looks
               | like he started his career in 1987. This is an
               | interesting looking resume. Tons of skills at the top,
               | goals, Other. I suppose it's cover-lettery.
               | 
               | edit: Oh, nevermind, he has a career page updated in 2019
               | - http://www.toms.net/career/ - so I guess he's been with
               | Fannie Mae from 2002 - now. Good, I was a bit worried
               | he'd left us.
        
       | feldrim wrote:
       | The issue of micro for me was the formatted paste. When I paste a
       | piece of code, micro tries to indent it line by line. Yet, it
       | does not have the whole picture. So it indents the pasted text
       | gradually to infinity. And line by line inferring the format
       | slows the process down to zero. You paste and go grab a coffee
       | instead of watching a Matrix-like paste scene.
       | 
       | I hope they solved it but I left at that point. If it is solved,
       | I can give it a try again.
        
         | mminer237 wrote:
         | I've had that happen once when I was using it on Windows with
         | Wezterm.
         | 
         | It depends on how you paste. I'm not 100% clear how it works,
         | but I believe micro reimplements pasting directly with xclip
         | (idk what it does on Windows) so if you paste with Ctrl+V, it
         | just instantly inserts what's on the clipboard as a block and
         | copies the source indentation. If you do Ctrl+Shift+V,
         | sometimes it essentially just gets the clipboard piped from the
         | terminal each character one at a time, not knowing what comes
         | next, so then it indents extra when it sees the return
         | character and then it naively gets a couple tabs added on top.
        
         | Yasuraka wrote:
         | You could disable it (Ctrl+E, 'set autoindent off')
         | 
         | https://github.com/zyedidia/micro/blob/master/runtime/help/o...
         | 
         | But even when enabled (like I have) it should indently
         | correctly when pasting entire blocks.
         | 
         | If you'd like to share your setup/env/config I'd take a look at
         | working out a patch
        
           | feldrim wrote:
           | It's been a while, I will try and create an issue. Bir I was
           | using the default setup IIRC.
        
             | Yasuraka wrote:
             | It is enabled by default so that wouldn't be unlikely, but
             | I was thinking more of the circumstances such as SSH
             | tunnels, xclip or wl-clipboard and similar (or perhaps the
             | most important one, version of micro itself)
        
               | feldrim wrote:
               | I only used it locally, so there wasn't any other
               | application in between. I used it on Windows but I don't
               | have the version -though I always keep it up to date, so
               | latest or minus one- or configuration now, yet I'll
               | update you with details when I get back from vacation.
               | Thanks!
        
       | pletnes wrote:
       | Is it super fast on large files? (Large is 1 GB+) I've used vim
       | or notepad++ for those in the past but would be happy to find
       | something faster.
        
         | bdhcuidbebe wrote:
         | I use textwrangler for those massive files. Check it out!
        
           | pletnes wrote:
           | Looks like mac only? I'm often stuck on windows. But thanks!
        
             | pbnjeh wrote:
             | Ages ago, there was TextPad -- a commercial product. Back
             | when I was munging textified order histories for a
             | multinational (lots of orders, ergo huge text files), it
             | was great up through version... 4.7.3, I seem to recall.
             | Then, they started redesigning some things in ways I found
             | enworsening (if I may be permitted to riff off of the
             | current linguistic trend). But, IIRC, it remained fast with
             | big files.
             | 
             | This all was 20+ years ago. I wonder whether they're still
             | around...
             | 
             | https://www.textpad.com/home
        
       | glebd wrote:
       | JOE is pretty nice https://joe-editor.sourceforge.io/ -- a hybrid
       | of WordStar and Emacs, and if you run it with `jstar` you get a
       | pretty authentic WordStar experience which also feels like the
       | earliest Borland Turbo IDEs.
        
         | NikkiA wrote:
         | native-mode joe is closer to zde/vde than wordstar, although
         | jstar obviously slides that closer to wordstar.
        
         | benhoyt wrote:
         | I used to love JOE! Maybe that's why, because it had echoes of
         | WordStar. I just wrote an article about how I still use the
         | "WordStar Diamond" keys in Linux today:
         | https://benhoyt.com/writings/wordstar-diamond/
        
         | diydsp wrote:
         | Yup! I often invoke it with "jmacs" to get the emacs keyboard
         | shortcut set.
        
         | Tomte wrote:
         | Are the differences between the modes and their keybindings not
         | documented in the manual?
         | 
         | Probably I'm just stupid and overlooked them, but I really
         | don't see anything.
        
         | cmrdporcupine wrote:
         | Great memories there, back in the 90s I used to use joe for
         | everything that wasn't editing code. Mainly because it just
         | isn't good at that, it's more of a "word processing" model,
         | with word wrapping and lack of syntax highlighting, etc.
         | 
         | But for writing text documents? Lovely little editor.
        
           | jhallenworld wrote:
           | You should try a more recent version of it: sudo apt-get
           | install joe
           | 
           | JOE has syntax highlighting, UTF-8, regex, shell windows, hex
           | editing, incremental search, column/rectangular block,
           | macros..
        
         | deepspace wrote:
         | Yes! The first word processor I used was Wordstar (under CP/M).
         | My first programming environment was Borland Turbo Pascal.
         | Later, I used "QEdit", which was configurable to use the
         | wordstar keys.
         | 
         | When I finally migrated from DOS to Unix, in the early 90s, I
         | was delighted to discover JOE. It is the first program I
         | install on any new Linux or *BSD box or VM.
         | 
         | JOE has syntax highlighting and several other nice features
         | these days. I have therefore never felt the need to get
         | proficient with vi or emacs.
        
       | sramsay wrote:
       | I suggest nano to my students in classes where everyone is a
       | beginner and we're learning programming on the command line.
       | 
       | The greatest advantage of nano for these users is that all the
       | commands are listed along the bottom of the screen. I was shocked
       | to see that this is not true of micro.
        
         | Aloha wrote:
         | Alt-G brings that up apparently.
         | 
         | Control-G brings up help
         | 
         | There is also some sort of comment mode
        
           | b33j0r wrote:
           | I love micro for having mouse mode by default.
           | 
           | I use it to debug containers and short-lived VMs, because
           | it's easier to copy/paste stuff than configuring neovim
           | (which I would normally use).
           | 
           | However! "Help" doesn't start with G. That's a bit weird. And
           | someone mentioned ctrl-c. That's a bit weird too ;)
        
         | lofatdairy wrote:
         | I imagine that the intention of micro is more like a modern,
         | extensible editor, rather than a beginner friendly or
         | ubiquitous editor. I think in the latter aspects, nano is still
         | probably what you'd want to recommend your students (until
         | they're ready for vim /s). micro is probably more for people
         | who learned using nano but need more functionality/want a nicer
         | ui.
        
           | indymike wrote:
           | Our team uses micro as the standard quick and dirty text
           | editor, and we really like it. Micro uses familiar key
           | bindings, which really helps. The name kid of tells the story
           | on functionality Nano < Micro < vim or Emacs. I do thing
           | Micro is a fantastic option for students mainly because they
           | already have the key bindings drilled into their heads.
        
         | vdfs wrote:
         | by this trend, pico should show the whole man page in the
         | bottom of the screen
        
         | rob74 wrote:
         | The difference between micro and nano is that nano's keyboard
         | shortcuts are pretty opinionated, while micro's are the ones
         | used by most (GUI) applications nowadays: Ctrl+S for saving,
         | Ctrl+F for find, Ctrl+Z for undo, Ctrl+Q to exit etc. etc.
         | There is also a helpful hint at the bottom of the screen that
         | you can press Alt+G to see the shortcuts, or Ctrl+G for some
         | help.
        
           | mdaniel wrote:
           | > Ctrl-S for saving ... Ctrl+Q to exit
           | 
           | Using a flow control sequences for editor commands; what can
           | go wrong?
        
             | mardifoufs wrote:
             | Wait I don't understand the issue. What are you referring
             | to?
        
               | kip_ wrote:
               | Some of us graybeards use to use teletypes to talk to our
               | computers. In one of the earlier races between differing
               | I/O, the printer couldn't print as fast as the teletype
               | was receiving data, so the teletype would send XOFF
               | (Ctrl-S) to tell the remote end "Stop sending data and
               | let me catch up" and would then send XON (Ctrl-Q) to say
               | "I'm caught up, go back to sending data.
               | 
               | Many of us carried that to our VT100 terminals and used
               | it when lines of code or output would flood the screen
               | faster than we could read.
               | 
               | Eventually paginators like 'more' and 'less' were
               | invented and flow control via the keyboard codes for
               | XON/XOFF fell out of favor, but some of us have very
               | strong muscle memory. :)
        
             | rollcat wrote:
             | It conveniently translates to "save and exit"!
             | 
             | Hopefully a cautionary tale against careless in-band
             | signalling.
        
           | tivert wrote:
           | > The difference between micro and nano is that nano's
           | keyboard shortcuts are pretty opinionated, while micro's are
           | the ones used by most (GUI) applications nowadays:
           | 
           | Opinionated, or just old and consistent? Nano is a clone of
           | an editor related in _1989_. Things weren 't as settled back
           | then. IIRC, I remember Ctrl-X was used to exit some DOS apps.
           | IIRC, the current "GUI conventions" originated as Mac-isms in
           | 1983/84.
           | 
           | > Ctrl+S for saving, Ctrl+F for find, Ctrl+Z for undo, Ctrl+Q
           | to exit etc. etc. There is also a helpful hint at the bottom
           | of the screen that you can press Alt+G to see the shortcuts,
           | or Ctrl+G for some help.
           | 
           | So, about that Ctrl-C...
        
             | codedokode wrote:
             | > Opinionated, or just old and consistent?
             | 
             | That old hotkeys didn't survive the evolution so it doesn't
             | make sense to support them anymore.
        
               | tivert wrote:
               | > That old hotkeys didn't survive the evolution so it
               | doesn't make sense to support them anymore.
               | 
               | No. It makes sense to support them if the userbase is
               | familiar with them. Nothing is more annoying than having
               | changes like that forced on you.
               | 
               | Then there's the fact that the "GUI standards" conflict
               | with other command-line standards in a pretty serious
               | way. Every command shell on Windows I've ever used uses a
               | different convention than the "GUI standard" for copy-
               | paste for exactly that reason (e.g. Windows Command
               | Prompt's "mark" stuff, PuTTY's select/middle-click
               | behavior).
        
               | codedokode wrote:
               | > userbase is familiar
               | 
               | I think that every user who can use terminal, knows
               | combinations like Ctrl + S (Save) or Ctrl + C (Copy). So
               | they are familiar to them as well and should cause no
               | problems.
               | 
               | For me, for example, those combinations from vi, nano or
               | emacs are simply weird and non-standard. And I assume
               | that they are "non-standard" for everyone who was born
               | after 1980 and have never seen a PDP or something from
               | that era.
               | 
               | Therefore it doen't make sense to support those key
               | combinations only because 40 years ago they were used in
               | PDP and other archaic systems.
        
               | GoblinSlayer wrote:
               | Won't such hardcore oldtimers use vi anyway? I thought
               | the point of nano was to be like notepad.
        
               | cesarb wrote:
               | > I thought the point of nano was to be like notepad.
               | 
               | No, the point of nano was to be like pico.
        
               | MagicMoonlight wrote:
               | Lmao what userbase, you're talking about software from 40
               | years ago
        
               | stonetrw wrote:
               | Yes, it's time inferior gui apps start freezing when you
               | press C-z.
        
       | defanor wrote:
       | It calls its terminal multiplexer functionality "terminal
       | emulator", it seems. Unless it has a GUI, but then "terminal-
       | based" is wrong.
       | 
       | I am not a fan of nano, as it is not even qualified to attend the
       | editor war, but this one adds JSON configuration, "curl | bash"
       | installation, has a JS-dependent website, and generally looks
       | even more awkward than nano. Apparently both nano and this editor
       | have their target audience, as do all those other "modern"
       | editors, but observing this triggers the feelings likely similar
       | to those that lead to flamewars: it is painful to observe
       | seemingly inefficient and otherwise awkward tools used by others,
       | and tempting to suggest to look into better options.
        
         | mgaunard wrote:
         | try looking at a "modern" text editor; the one which appears to
         | have the highest popularity is visual studio code.
         | 
         | It's an awful slow mess that cannot stop itself from triggering
         | unsolicited popups, eating all your RAM and inserting
         | characters you didn't type.
         | 
         | The reality is that this is the reality of programmers today,
         | they want something that does a shitty work for them rather
         | than be in control.
        
           | linuxdude314 wrote:
           | I have absolutely none of the problems you are describing
           | with VSCode.
           | 
           | You have an immense amount of control over VSCode and its
           | plugin ecosystem is fantastic.
           | 
           | This sounds like more of a problem with your workstation or
           | environment.
        
             | mgaunard wrote:
             | Just opening a file with default settings.
             | 
             | "hey, looks like you're opening a C++ file, would you like
             | to download our C++ plugin?"
             | 
             | and other infinite amounts of similar popups.
             | 
             | Then I type (, it chooses to insert a ). I didn't ask for
             | this.
        
         | jtriangle wrote:
         | You know what nano's good for? Editing a few lines of a config
         | file every now and then.
         | 
         | For that purpose, it's great, works a peach, and is as at least
         | as good as every other option if not better.
         | 
         | And that's what 99% of people use it for, because that's what
         | 99% of people need in a terminal based text editor. Those
         | people don't tend to participate in these sorts of discussions
         | because, well, they're probably still trying to figire out how
         | to exit vim after someone told them vim was better than nano.
        
           | cesarb wrote:
           | > You know what nano's good for? Editing a few lines of a
           | config file every now and then.
           | 
           | As long as you always start it as "nano -w" to prevent its
           | enabled-by-default (at least on some versions) word wrapping
           | from corrupting your config file.
        
         | mixmastamyk wrote:
         | sudo apt install micro
         | 
         | Not awkward, it uses keybindings you already know if you've
         | used a PC or Mac in the last 40 years. :-/
        
           | prmoustache wrote:
           | I think the vim keybinding are the one I have used in the
           | last 35 years.
        
             | mixmastamyk wrote:
             | I first learned on a Commodore... run stop restore! But
             | then DOS edit.
        
           | berkeleynerd wrote:
           | Definitely this. I'm super happy for anyone finding some new
           | level of productivity with vim, emacs, kakoune, etc. but I
           | don't want to join an editor cult, not even a CUA one. I just
           | want to edit text from the command line using a familiar set
           | of keystrokes and move on with my life and micro fits the
           | bill.
        
       | codedokode wrote:
       | What disappoints me most is that terminal editors often use weird
       | hotkeys that are unique only to them instead of using widspread
       | hotkeys. What I want, is, for example, to use Ctrl + S for saving
       | and not some other combination.
        
         | cryptecks wrote:
         | You may be in luck, because the default keybinding for Save in
         | micro is indeed Ctrl-S. I installed it and aliased it over Nano
         | for a bit on one of the servers I SSH into constantly, just to
         | test it out.
        
         | dietr1ch wrote:
         | Good luck using C-z for undoing
        
           | codedokode wrote:
           | Why not? Those control combinations can be disabled if I
           | remember correctly. Also, as they conflict with modern
           | hotkeys, they should be changed everywhere.
        
             | just_mc wrote:
             | Micro supports both Ctrl-C for 'copy' and Ctrl-Z for
             | 'undo'.
             | 
             | For someone who started using computers in the mid/late
             | nineties or later, it is super intuitive and I much prefer
             | it over anything else.
        
         | TheHippo wrote:
         | That is what makes micro so easy to use. It uses widespread
         | hotkeys.
        
       | andridk wrote:
       | I thought Nano was the modern alternative to Pico ^_^
        
         | mjhagen wrote:
         | I'm holding out for Macro.
        
           | sph wrote:
           | Yes, a Macro Editor... perhaps with some Editor MACroS.
        
           | xvedejas wrote:
           | according to SI, the opposite of micro (10^-6) is mega (10^6)
        
             | mgaunard wrote:
             | if you look at the progression pico, nano, micro, then you
             | can see its 3 times bigger everytime, not the inverse.
             | 
             | So the next one should be milli.
        
               | evujumenuk wrote:
               | Followed by... what?
               | 
               | Unity? We could also have an unpronounceable empty
               | string, and refer to it as TEFKAM, The Editor Formerly
               | Known As `milli`.
        
               | Ekaros wrote:
               | At that point for a few generations we do only 10x centi,
               | deci, deca and hecto.
        
               | evujumenuk wrote:
               | The taglines basically write themselves. 'A 10x editor
               | for 10x engineers.'
        
               | velosol wrote:
               | https://10xeditor.com/ might prefer you use a different
               | number ;)
        
               | thaumasiotes wrote:
               | > We could also have an unpronounceable empty string
               | 
               | For what I assume are historical reasons, the empty
               | string is usually called "lambda".
        
               | eternityforest wrote:
               | Is macro the one after milli?
        
               | mgaunard wrote:
               | macro is not a SI prefix.
        
               | mykhamill wrote:
               | There are two scale systems at play.
               | 
               | pico, nano, micro, milli, unit, kilo, Mega, Giga... Which
               | relates to the SI units.
               | 
               | And Micro,Meso and Macro scaling system that centers
               | around human sized reality.
        
               | julesnp wrote:
               | Don't forget centi-, deci-, deka-, and hecto-.
        
               | eternityforest wrote:
               | SI doesn't have a prefix for 1x does it? Doe you'd need a
               | non-SI like macro or meso, or just to jump from milli to
               | kilo. Or call it Editor One or just Editor.
        
         | l-albertovich wrote:
         | It'd be funny to silently alias quetta=emacs in systems. I
         | wonder what would people think when they find it.
        
       | pie_flavor wrote:
       | Micro to me strikes a perfect balance of easy enough to get
       | working out of the box and not so simple it's stifling. I wish it
       | came with LSP support built-in though.
        
       | hobo_mark wrote:
       | Is there any console editor that supports VS Code key bindings?
        
         | moffkalast wrote:
         | Well VS code is electron, so you could just launch chromium in
         | kiosk mode with xinit and have VS code render in the actual
         | terminal I guess?
        
       | delfinom wrote:
       | So it reinvented vim/emacs and friends and called it an
       | alternative to nano without understanding what nano is.
       | 
       | That's like saying Visual Studio is an alternative to Notepad
       | with a straight face. I mean sure, both could type text but it's
       | fundamentally a different product.
        
         | NayamAmarshe wrote:
         | Its main idea is the simplicity. It supports regular GUI editor
         | like syntax and code highlighting.
         | 
         | It's not like nano or vim or emacs. It's for people who prefer
         | OOTB simplicity.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-08-18 23:02 UTC)