111–120 of 420 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
According to Wikipedia ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vi and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emacs ) both vi and Emacs are from 1976. 40 years this year!
vi is not Vim.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So for me the question is why there are still people that enjoy working as if their computers are using a 25 year old developer experience. For me it's the question, why it's so hard to understand that people have different likings without to downgrade them? Everyone thinks that his/her decisions are the most sensible ones, but in most cases they aren't.
It often _is_ the most sensible choice, _for them_. The problem is, not everyone is doing the same job in the same environement, and they have a hard time realizing that. Their empathy/imagination stays too close to their own experience.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You edit text. That's a big part of your "developer experience", and XCode/IntelliJ don't really change that. Most of their innovations focus on the high-level, and they tend to be serious let down when it comes to straight-forward text manipulation. No progress since CUA there. Using a SmallTalk system was a somewhat different experience. Now that was integrated .
Smalltalk started the whole IDE idea actually. The VM ( or image) is the run time and the editor at the same time. The level of integration and introspection made the whole thing very powerfull and inspired other IDEs to have this features, which without the software development could have been very slow.
Yet as opposed to ST, Mesa or Lisp they have to integrate this with files and executables, which makes things a lot more cumbersome. And then you get something like the web, where the moving parts are even further removed from each other.
The problem is that IDEs and powerful editing aren't exactly opposites (let's not forget that Emacs is basically a Lisp IDE). But I've yet to see an IDE that comes close, mostly because the lack of a good extension language (plugins are way too heavy), and possibly because the GUI provides a bigger impedance to additions.
I really like the trend towards "headless" IDE backends.
I have vim, neovim and emacs (and spacemacs) installed. Right now I'm trying to get into emacs a bit more. What's interesting to me, and the reason I try to keep up to date with the latest changes for all four editors, is that it's been now, what, 25 years (?) since emacs and vim started "competing" and they still are. I guess we could be saying the same in 10 years about firefox and chrome, but it still is amazing i…
I became an heavy Emacs user as I could not find the comfort of Borland IDEs in UNIX, as I started to use it. Since I moved away from C++ into Java and .NET land, never felt the need to use them any longer. And nowadays, with Qt Creator, Clion, xCode, AppCode and VS, I also don't feel the need of them when I need to go back to C++. It is very good to know the basics from plain Vi, because there are still commercial U…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I used to think like this, but I don't any more. Both command line development tools and IDEs require work to get the most out of them. I used to think command line tools were better because I was more in control, then I realised if I just spent the time learning what IDEs were doing on my behalf I would still have more or less the same amount of control, especially if the IDE is customisable (which the best ones are…
That's decidedly not true. Nor is this about customization of workflows. I am talking about actual unadulterated power to do things you cannot do in an IDE. All IDEs optimize for the average use case. If they do expose a set of advanced commands or transformations, they are hidden deep in the menus and what you can do with them is extremely rigid and limited. At most you have a few dozen commands (you would call them…
Honestly, it's not a crime to like nice windows, y'know.
Before neovim: Asyncronous operations? "Absolutely impossible"
After neovim: Asynchronous operations? "Why, of course, here, with a cherry on top"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I became an heavy Emacs user as I could not find the comfort of Borland IDEs in UNIX, as I started to use it. Since I moved away from C++ into Java and .NET land, never felt the need to use them any longer. And nowadays, with Qt Creator, Clion, xCode, AppCode and VS, I also don't feel the need of them when I need to go back to C++. It is very good to know the basics from plain Vi, because there are still commercial U…
First of all, the key point of emacs is extensibility and customizability. So as new stuff comes up, e.g. new programming languages, debuggers, file formats, emacs can be extended without too much pain to work with them (and often, somebody has already done that for me). Secondly, working mainly as a sysadmin and only sometimes doing some development, I do far more with emacs than coding. I edit configuration files,…
I use it to edit code simply because I feel at home in it, but I use very, very little of the functionality.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I believe that it is good that there is no winner. If you look at vim and emacs specifically their thinking is very different. I would say that with the best plugins, config and skills in the world you would not be able to make one as good as the other in the others corresponding strength. Each is a winner in their own regards.
I think we have 2 winners: Emacs on the "platform" (superior scripting language (elisp), better external process management, better instrumentation). Vim on the modal-editing interface: you can find it in nearly all editors (and even browsers) nowadays. A combination of the two would be awesome, correction "is" awesome: http://spacemacs.org
I have vim, neovim and emacs (and spacemacs) installed. Right now I'm trying to get into emacs a bit more. What's interesting to me, and the reason I try to keep up to date with the latest changes for all four editors, is that it's been now, what, 25 years (?) since emacs and vim started "competing" and they still are. I guess we could be saying the same in 10 years about firefox and chrome, but it still is amazing i…
I became an heavy Emacs user as I could not find the comfort of Borland IDEs in UNIX, as I started to use it. Since I moved away from C++ into Java and .NET land, never felt the need to use them any longer. And nowadays, with Qt Creator, Clion, xCode, AppCode and VS, I also don't feel the need of them when I need to go back to C++. It is very good to know the basics from plain Vi, because there are still commercial U…
The GUI paradigm is over 30 years old. People still stick to the mouse even though we've had ubiquitous touchscreens for almost a decade.
A good paradigm does not easily die.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I became an heavy Emacs user as I could not find the comfort of Borland IDEs in UNIX, as I started to use it. Since I moved away from C++ into Java and .NET land, never felt the need to use them any longer. And nowadays, with Qt Creator, Clion, xCode, AppCode and VS, I also don't feel the need of them when I need to go back to C++. It is very good to know the basics from plain Vi, because there are still commercial U…
I don't need to learn Qt Creator, Clion, xCode, AppCode and VS if I already know vim. Why I would to need to use a different text editor for each different language?