Live data from Hacker News

Emac’s Org Mode will improve your software engineering

medium.com

111–120 of 131 posts

Re: Emac’s Org Mode will improve your software engineering

#111

I don't know why so many people make the point that hierarchical structures are how the brain works. Graphical structures are how the brain works. The hierarchical structure is how the physical world works (you can't put the same shirt in two closets), and we have an unfortunate habit of trying to force our brain to work the same way, but it's an impedance mismatch. Unless I'm the only one that is frustrated that you…

You're right about hierarchy in the world, but there's a deeper truth that you're missing that relates to hierarchical structures being more amenable to description: The fact then that many complex systems have a nearly decomposable, hierarchic structure is a major facilitating factor enabling us to understand, describe, and even "see" such systems and their parts. Or perhaps the proposition should be put the other w…

I guess my POV is that hierarchic systems are inherently limiting to us, for data that isn't truly hierarchical (as is usually true for data).

Using graphically-linked data, one could write a process that would generate a hierarchical structure that minimizes crosslinks, and that hierarchy would presumably remain stable right up until the point that a certain relationship is changed, at which point the entire generated hierarchy might be reshuffled. But if we manually assert such a hierarchy, then we have incentive to ignore relationship changes, or try to force them to work within the same hierarchical structure that doesn't serve it anymore. It inhibits our ability to process and understand.

We have more and more ability to visualize true graphical structures and I think it's underutilized in general.

Thanks for the recommendation; I will check it out.

Re: Emac’s Org Mode will improve your software engineering

#112
post #20

I don't know why so many people make the point that hierarchical structures are how the brain works. Graphical structures are how the brain works. The hierarchical structure is how the physical world works (you can't put the same shirt in two closets), and we have an unfortunate habit of trying to force our brain to work the same way, but it's an impedance mismatch. Unless I'm the only one that is frustrated that you…

Org-mode supports tags http://orgmode.org/manual/Tags.html Though "chunking" (group related stuff) recursively is exactly how the brain works https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chunking_(psychology)

Chunking is fine, but there's nothing about our brain that limits us from having the same item in multiple chunks.

Re: Emac’s Org Mode will improve your software engineering

#114
post #83

A key point to this article is that the author does his development work in Emacs, so for him, taking notes doesn't require him to switch or launch a new application. As a lowly Windows developer, I struggle to make use of any note taking application outside of a sheet of paper. I'm sure a tool like OrgMode, Zim, or OneNote would help me organize my life, but as soon as I try to do this, I simply ask myself, why not…

I use OneNote on a daily basis and really like it. Mostly just an easy way to write down text with simple markup. Tables work well and you can add checkboxes if you want. OneNote's search is IMO it's killer feature. After you've built up a sizable amount of content you're going to start to need to search for stuff and it's pretty much instantaneous. Also returns results for pictures too (using OCR).

I use a Windows Phone which came with OneNote. It automatically syncs between my phone and my desktop. It's really nice when I'm out on the town and have an idea or something I want to jot down.

Re: Emac’s Org Mode will improve your software engineering

#115
post #52
post #48

I use my own wiki for everything I want to remember, and have used it as a GTD method. But in the end I moved away for GTD stuff. I used Chandler, and really liked it, but then it was abandoned. Then I used Quickfox Notes in Firefox to make a simple plaintext todo list. That works OK til now. Lately I've been using Evernote more and more, and now I mix them all more or less. I've tried Emacs, tried the Eclipse todo,…

I had a similar issue has well. I ended up in Onenote for years, and honestly I had no real issue. . . until my move to linux mint. Now I'm using raw text for the time being.

The webapp version of OneNote works pretty well. I use it on Linux with no troubles.

https://www.onenote.com/hrd

Re: Emac’s Org Mode will improve your software engineering

#116

What this story and many of the comments herein miss is that org-mode coupled with org-babel is a full-fledged multilanguage literate programming environment. When you have access to the shell, Python (w/ matplotlib for graphs), Clojure, R, etc. right in your org buffer, and can interact between them (and even pass data between cells of different languages), you really do have what Ken Iverson (inventor of APL, Turin…

So it's like ipython notebook?

Re: Emac’s Org Mode will improve your software engineering

#117
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pencil and paper is much better for me for making quick notes to be honest. I actually don't like writing my brain dumps on a computer because it makes it harder for me to think about them. I find that physically using a pencil helps me develop my ideas more because I have to reiterate what I'm writing while writing it. It's definitely a personal preference, maybe it comes from the fact that I always draw things on p…

The problems with paper notes are poor searchability, linking, extracting/copying of data, and portability. But yes, there are advantages to paper, like the ability to easily draw diagrams and link ideas with arrows, etc. On the other hand, if you need that, you could always use something like a Wacom tablet, or maybe some other touch-screen device with a stylus. That would give you the best of both worlds.

Or the worst of both worlds?

Re: Emac’s Org Mode will improve your software engineering

#118
post #79

I don't know why so many people make the point that hierarchical structures are how the brain works. Graphical structures are how the brain works. The hierarchical structure is how the physical world works (you can't put the same shirt in two closets), and we have an unfortunate habit of trying to force our brain to work the same way, but it's an impedance mismatch. Unless I'm the only one that is frustrated that you…

> I don't know why so many people make the point that hierarchical structures are how the brain works. Graphical structures are how the brain works. Holographic to be precise...

Ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holonomic_brain_theory

Re: Emac’s Org Mode will improve your software engineering

#119
post #116

What this story and many of the comments herein miss is that org-mode coupled with org-babel is a full-fledged multilanguage literate programming environment. When you have access to the shell, Python (w/ matplotlib for graphs), Clojure, R, etc. right in your org buffer, and can interact between them (and even pass data between cells of different languages), you really do have what Ken Iverson (inventor of APL, Turin…

So it's like ipython notebook?

Similar, but in a lot ways org is more powerful than Jupyter Notebooks which I am also a big fan of, BTW. It is more powerful because of the exporting facilities, tangling, and you have all of emacs at your fingertips. I actually would like to develop an org exporter to ipynb format.

Re: Emac’s Org Mode will improve your software engineering

#120
post #88

What this story and many of the comments herein miss is that org-mode coupled with org-babel is a full-fledged multilanguage literate programming environment. When you have access to the shell, Python (w/ matplotlib for graphs), Clojure, R, etc. right in your org buffer, and can interact between them (and even pass data between cells of different languages), you really do have what Ken Iverson (inventor of APL, Turin…

I agree, Babel is often overlooked subset of orgmode's features. The linked article that's spawning these comments doesn't do an especially good job of explaining why a developer would should want to use orgmode. Common problem, though, orgmode is far more than an outliner tool, a lot of what it does is truly mindblowing. Orgmode has so many features, and there are so many ways to combine them, that it's really hard…

I've been using org-mode in various capacities for a little over a year now. I've tried other tools but keep coming back. As far as complexity goes, I feel like I'm barely scratching the surface. I like what Neal Stephenson has to say about emacs (which applies just as much to org-mode):

In the GNU/Linux world there are two major text editing programs: the minimalist vi (known in some implementations as elvis) and the maximalist emacs. I use emacs, which might be thought of as a thermonuclear word processor. It was created by Richard Stallman; enough said. It is written in Lisp, which is the only computer language that is beautiful. It is colossal, and yet it only edits straight ASCII text files, which is to say, no fonts, no boldface, no underlining. In other words, the engineer-hours that, in the case of Microsoft Word, were devoted to features like mail merge, and the ability to embed feature-length motion pictures in corporate memoranda, were, in the case of emacs, focused with maniacal intensity on the deceptively simple-seeming problem of editing text. If you are a professional writer – i.e., if someone else is getting paid to worry about how your words are formatted and printed – emacs outshines all other editing software in approximately the same way that the noonday sun does the stars. It is not just bigger and brighter; it simply makes everything else vanish. [1]

A few things for newbies that might help:

1. A lot of org-mode 'power users' post their workflows and all of the attendant emacs lisp code [2] [3], and many new users feel like they have to customize their org-mode experience to that level to get any use out of it. DO NOT DO THIS! Start completely fresh with a clean install, just use it as a braindump outliner, and SLOWLY start adding new features as you go, based specifically on what you need for your individual workflow (the most useful first thing to learn for most people, after basic outline creation and folding, is probably the agenda view). This way you 'grow' the program to fit your own needs organically, rather than trying to shoehorn yourself into someone else's idea of a perfect workflow.

2. One customization thing I will say you should do immediately is to change the theme to match your preferred UI style. It will make a huge difference in how you 'feel' while you're using it. I love emacs but I hate, hate, hate the default UI look-and-feel. I will plug leuven-theme [4] as my current go-to for org-mode, but also dig the sanityinc tomorrow themes [5].

I will also throw in a compliment to the awesome community around emacs. It's happened to me many times where I've encountered some shortcoming or 'missing' feature of my existing setup, thought to myself "if only I could do X and Y," and discovered after 5 minutes of Googling that someone has already written something that does exactly what I'm looking for...

[1] from 'In The Beginning Was The Command Line' (1999) [2] http://pages.sachachua.com/.emacs.d/Sacha.html [3] http://doc.norang.ca/org-mode.html [4] https://github.com/fniessen/emacs-leuven-theme [5] https://github.com/purcell/color-theme-sanityinc-tomorrow

Post reply on HN