Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: I made a tool that made me faster at Git

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 235 posts

Re: Show HN: I made a tool that made me faster at Git

#161

Post by cup-of-tea »

kungtotte wrote: post #110
nickbarnwell wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The videos touch upon a fraction of magit’s capabilities; if nothing else, it’s a far more mature project. But the real power is integration with the rest of emacs/being written in elisp. If I want to change or script behaviour, I have easy access to all the internals, and I can integrate it with other parts of my emacs workflow. For example, I can use magit to view the diff of a coworker’s PR, easily capture snippet…

Whenever I read a comment or blog post about Emacs I'm like "I should definitely try it out, because that sounds awesome", then I do try it and it turns out it's a pain in the ass to make it work on Windows and I spend more time fiddling with it than I do working with it. It's the same thing with vim for that matter. A basic-ish text editor setup is trivial in both editors but beyond that things start to fall apart.…

> I think that's why VSCode has gained so much traction. For coding it's got easily 90% of the same features as both vim and Emacs

Is that a joke? How can you possibly know this if you haven't used emacs for a start. Do you really think it has 90% of the features of a 35 year old project?

If emacs is difficult to set up on Windows you should stop using it. The awesome stuff you hear about is mostly the result of using emacs on an OS that is decent for development. But if you insist on staying in your prison then you'll have to put up with what Microsoft lets you have.

Re: Show HN: I made a tool that made me faster at Git

#162

Post by sushid »

jolmg wrote: post #115
eljimmy wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm also not tired of typing git commands. It seems almost natural now. With that said, this individual spent their free time to create something using their skills which they perceived to be an improvement/optimization upon their skill-set and shared it with the world. IMHO, that's commendable.

It definitely is. I didn't mean to sound dismissive of his work, but I can see how it does. My intent was rather to inform those who haven't realized, OP seemingly included, that the shell can be very efficient to work with. I can't see myself using this tool and being more productive than I already am with the shell, but I can still appreciate the effort and generosity in making it available to the world.

I mean, to be fair, you are essentially saying you are not tired of typing git commands only because you type shorthands you've created. It feels like you're raining on his parade a bit because he didn't do the same thing you did.

I use aliases too but I also use SourceTree (gasp) for bigger commits. It's not even that I don't know how to git add -p, but clicking "add this hunk" is way easier to do.

Re: Show HN: I made a tool that made me faster at Git

#163

Post by singingfish »

hv42 wrote: post #130
jolmg wrote: post #66

> are YOU tired of typing every git command directly into the terminal I'm not. Are there many people that are? Is this not just a matter of learning to use shell keybindings effectively? That and aliases does wonders to avoid repetitive typing. Many times I type `git s` (alias for `git status -s`) out of reflex when I really meant to do `ls`. When I forget to add `-a` to `git ci -m ...` (`ci` being `commit`) and get…

If you editor has a correct git support, you never need to do git status because it will show you which files had been edited since the last commit. Every time I hear people saying how much they prefer the git command line is because they never seriously tried to leverage the git features of their IDE. Vs code with git lens or intellij idea have excellent git integration. Everything is one shortcut away. The git comm…

My IDE is bash. I use almost always use emacs -nw for editing text. While there are git front ends for emacs, I almost never bother with them. I can't remember what I've memorised about the git CLI, but usually I don't find the CLI troublesome. YMMV.

Re: Show HN: I made a tool that made me faster at Git

#164

Post by cup-of-tea »

nkantar wrote: post #85
nickbarnwell wrote: post #41

If you're an emacs user, I can't recommend magit [1] enough. I was a diehard CLI user and had flags and aliases out the wazoo, and it was still a step change in usabilty and power for me. Staging hunks, rebasing, and stashing are all vastly easier. Amending or editing a commit is a breeze, and it's tied in to all of the other emacs tools you already use, e.g. org-mode to boot! It's easier to see it in action than exp…

Seeing a former coworker use Magit in Emacs is what got me to look into the Vim version: https://github.com/jreybert/vimagit From what I gather it's nowhere near as feature-complete, but it lets me create commits with immense ease and precision.

> Seeing a former coworker use Magit in Emacs is what got me to look into the Vim version

What you should have done is use magit and looked into the emacs version of vim: https://github.com/emacs-evil/evil

Re: Show HN: I made a tool that made me faster at Git

#165

Post by laumars »

hv42 wrote: post #130
jolmg wrote: post #66

> are YOU tired of typing every git command directly into the terminal I'm not. Are there many people that are? Is this not just a matter of learning to use shell keybindings effectively? That and aliases does wonders to avoid repetitive typing. Many times I type `git s` (alias for `git status -s`) out of reflex when I really meant to do `ls`. When I forget to add `-a` to `git ci -m ...` (`ci` being `commit`) and get…

If you editor has a correct git support, you never need to do git status because it will show you which files had been edited since the last commit. Every time I hear people saying how much they prefer the git command line is because they never seriously tried to leverage the git features of their IDE. Vs code with git lens or intellij idea have excellent git integration. Everything is one shortcut away. The git comm…

> Every time I hear people saying how much they prefer the git command line is because they never seriously tried to leverage the git features of their IDE.

I have used IDEs but I still prefer the CLI client.

Like with most things in IT, GUIs are great for simple things but the CLI is more expressive and exposes more options. Then once you've spent enough time using the CLI tools it's sometimes more jarring to switch between the GUI and CLI than it is to just use the CLI for simple tasks that could easily be done in the GUI.

Re: Show HN: I made a tool that made me faster at Git

#167

Post by Naomarik »

tcoff91 wrote: post #121
BeetleB wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>then I do try it and it turns out it's a pain in the ass to make it work on Windows and I spend more time fiddling with it than I do working with it. The first few times I did it on Windows it was a pain (almost a decade ago). You had to install some dependencies manually. But the last few times I did it it really was a straightforward install, with everything working out of the box (except any commands that rely on…

How did you get magit to not be slow as hell on Windows? It’s brutally slow on my windows box and lightning quick on my Mac.

Best setup I've found was to run everything within WSL when developing on Windows and exporting emacs display to Mobaxterm's x-server for a proper emacs experience. Everything is extremely fast and I find myself using my Mac less frequently now since WSL is working very well for me.

Re: Show HN: I made a tool that made me faster at Git

#168

Post by jolmg »

sushid wrote: post #162
jolmg wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It definitely is. I didn't mean to sound dismissive of his work, but I can see how it does. My intent was rather to inform those who haven't realized, OP seemingly included, that the shell can be very efficient to work with. I can't see myself using this tool and being more productive than I already am with the shell, but I can still appreciate the effort and generosity in making it available to the world.

I mean, to be fair, you are essentially saying you are not tired of typing git commands only because you type shorthands you've created. It feels like you're raining on his parade a bit because he didn't do the same thing you did. I use aliases too but I also use SourceTree (gasp) for bigger commits. It's not even that I don't know how to git add -p, but clicking "add this hunk" is way easier to do.

> I mean, to be fair, you are essentially saying you are not tired of typing git commands only because you type shorthands you've created. It feels like you're raining on his parade a bit because he didn't do the same thing you did.

Well, it's not like I did something unique. The aliases feature of git is precisely to make commonly used commands shorter, so I found it odd that OP would make a whole new git front-end, apparently to solve the same problem. That's why I asked, "Are there many people that are?", because I wanted to know if many others also found the shell insufficiently efficient and maybe discuss that.

I didn't mean to rain on his parade, but I can see that he might not have expected his post's discussion to mostly be about CLI vs GUI or integrating git with editors vs not. I honestly did not expect this much discussion to come out of my comment, either. Then again, how a discussion develops within a community is not really in any individual's control.

Re: Show HN: I made a tool that made me faster at Git

#169

Post by muxator »

jordigh wrote: post #44
stockkid wrote: post #21

Personally I have been typing all git commands manually into the terminal and never felt a need for GUIs or tools such as this. There are a number of git shortcuts defined in my zsh aliases [0]. It goes like: # Git aliases alias g='git' alias ga='git add' alias ghb='git browse' # hub alias ghpr='git pull-request' # hub alias gp='git push' alias gpoh='git push origin HEAD' ... Using these aliases, we rarely have to ty…

With Mercurial, I like that all commands can be abbreviated to their shortest unique prefix, plus some built-in aliases. So I type a lot of `hg up`, `hg pus`, `hg ci`, `hg pul`, `hg bo`, and so forth. Most of these are almost the same length as your aliases. Whenever I have to touch git and `git co` doesn't work, I think, okay, fine, we'll go through the full dress rehearsal; `git checkout` it is.

Plus, actually sane command names, and super powerful functionalities (for example, answering to another comment, you always could "hg blame (annotate)" an arbitrary version of a file without having to check it out first)!

Re: Show HN: I made a tool that made me faster at Git

#170

Post by int_19h »

jolmg wrote: post #147
hv42 wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you editor has a correct git support, you never need to do git status because it will show you which files had been edited since the last commit. Every time I hear people saying how much they prefer the git command line is because they never seriously tried to leverage the git features of their IDE. Vs code with git lens or intellij idea have excellent git integration. Everything is one shortcut away. The git comm…

> If you editor has a correct git support, you never need to do git status because it will show you which files had been edited since the last commit. I prefer sticking to the Unix way. An editor is an editor. Why should it support git specifically? Git is only tangentially related to file editing, so it doesn't really make sense for an editor to know anything specifically about it. > Every time I hear people saying…

> I prefer sticking to the Unix way. An editor is an editor. Why should it support git specifically?

Because it's convenient. IDEs work with files. Git manages files. Ergo, IDEs should support Git.

Post reply on HN