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

Sublime Text 3 marked as recommended build

sublimetext.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 135 posts

Re: Sublime Text 3 marked as recommended build

#91

Post by mstade »

mstade wrote: post #88

I'm not sure what all the missed-the-race type comments are all about – what does this even mean? ST3 is a solid editor with what I consider a very healthy plugin eco system. I don't think there's a single feature I've missed that so many seem to think are crucial to any reasonable development (web or otherwise) and its speed and accuracy is what keeps me as a customer. (Multi-file search and replace is a breeze, eve…

I forget to mention the fact that ST has saved my ass more than once by always keeping buffers persisted. This alone paid the price of admission several times over in not having to redo work when I've been a klutz.

Re: Sublime Text 3 marked as recommended build

#92

Post by wingerlang »

tiplus wrote: post #78

I feel that the comments here are too negative, which ST2/3 does not deserve. ST is still a supreme editor and using/paying for ST is not a bad thing. Wasn't it ST which introduced the cool look&feel and features which Atom and VSCode now adopted? I love the ST ctrl+d select (even if it existed before). PLUS: ST still has a super quick loading time which makes it a great addition to emacs/vi in some use cases.

> cool look&feel and features

Which ones?

And yes, cmd+d is the best thing since sliced bread.

Re: Sublime Text 3 marked as recommended build

#93

Post by throwaway6436 »

dvirsky wrote: post #54

Maybe I'm biased but it seems like Sublime lost its huge margin in the "editor race". Occasionally I try to use Sublime, but the plugins are always lacking. For my needs, VSCode is already better with better plugins (C, Go, Python), and I'm more productive with it although it lacks some features in the editor itself. And it doesn't feel slower even though it's written in JS. Plus it's open source. I hope the Sublime…

Man, the FUD in this thread. Shill much?

Is freemium the new EEE? How do you expect the man to make money?

Re: Sublime Text 3 marked as recommended build

#94

Post by humanfromearth »

biot wrote: post #81

Why are modern text editors so slow? Here's an editor that I use from 1996 opening up a 1GB file of randomly generated bytes (dd if=/dev/urandom of=random_bytes.txt bs=64M count=16): http://i.imgur.com/BVln6Y2.gif -- it opens instantly and I can scrub to any point in the file with no delay. I've yet to find a modern editor that beats my 1996 one.

Modern editors are much more that file browsers. They do static analysis, syntax colouring, linting and many more things (depending on what plugins you have installed). I still like to open a plain vim and just focus on the task at hand without the magic, but that's just not how most web developers work these days.

Re: Sublime Text 3 marked as recommended build

#95

Post by jskinner »

gelatocar wrote: post #79

I think the title of this should be updated, as it is not correct. The sublime text homepage has been displaying builds for sublime text 3 since mid February[0] Sublime Text 3 is still in beta. [0] https://web.archive.org/web/20160211015747/http://www.sublim...

This is correct, Sublime Text hasn't officially hit "3.0", but the current builds of Sublime Text 3 have been the reccomended versions to use for quite a while now, hence why the front page points to 3 rather than 2.

When 3.0 is out, there will be a blog post about it.

Re: Sublime Text 3 marked as recommended build

#96

Post by sundvor »

jskinner wrote: post #95
gelatocar wrote: post #79

I think the title of this should be updated, as it is not correct. The sublime text homepage has been displaying builds for sublime text 3 since mid February[0] Sublime Text 3 is still in beta. [0] https://web.archive.org/web/20160211015747/http://www.sublim...

This is correct, Sublime Text hasn't officially hit "3.0", but the current builds of Sublime Text 3 have been the reccomended versions to use for quite a while now, hence why the front page points to 3 rather than 2. When 3.0 is out, there will be a blog post about it.

Thanks Jon. My apologies; again, love your work.

Re: Sublime Text 3 marked as recommended build

#97

Post by FezVrasta »

Honestly I never used it because of its philosophy:

- it's not open source (which is something bad nowadays for a text editor)

- it's not really customizable (I must use my text editor all the day every day, I need an environment crafted on my needs)

- it's not free (why should I pay for something that is available for free with Atom?)

- it has python scripts... really? python? why?

Re: Sublime Text 3 marked as recommended build

#98

Post by dvirsky »

throwaway6436 wrote: post #93
dvirsky wrote: post #54

Maybe I'm biased but it seems like Sublime lost its huge margin in the "editor race". Occasionally I try to use Sublime, but the plugins are always lacking. For my needs, VSCode is already better with better plugins (C, Go, Python), and I'm more productive with it although it lacks some features in the editor itself. And it doesn't feel slower even though it's written in JS. Plus it's open source. I hope the Sublime…

Man, the FUD in this thread. Shill much? Is freemium the new EEE? How do you expect the man to make money?

Jetbrains seem to be making quite a lot of money from the IDEA series. Shill, really? I have nothing against Sublime charging money, the only reason I'm not buying it is that it's not a good enough editor (for me!).

What I'm saying is that if he opens at least some of Sublime it might help make it a better editor and advance faster with the help of a community. It certainly beats Sublime becoming irrelevant and dying eventually, which I really hope it won't. I'd really prefer using sublime, but I'm simply using the best tool (BTW Sublime is still a better editor, no plugins installed on either). Open source is a plus for me, not a must.

Re: Sublime Text 3 marked as recommended build

#99

Post by dvirsky »

imron wrote: post #82
dvirsky wrote: post #54

Maybe I'm biased but it seems like Sublime lost its huge margin in the "editor race". Occasionally I try to use Sublime, but the plugins are always lacking. For my needs, VSCode is already better with better plugins (C, Go, Python), and I'm more productive with it although it lacks some features in the editor itself. And it doesn't feel slower even though it's written in JS. Plus it's open source. I hope the Sublime…

> For my needs, VSCode is already better with better plugins I bet the Sublime spell-check plugin doesn't send your entire file to a third-party server over plain http.

Does VScode's?

Re: Sublime Text 3 marked as recommended build

#100

Post by oneeyedpigeon »

jsmeaton wrote: post #41
hantusk wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use Atom over Sublime Text solely for the Hydrogen plugin ( https://github.com/nteract/hydrogen ). That plugins are written in javascript (larger developer base) and allows more customization of Atom (more open plugin api) also yields more niche plugins.

In these threads I see "larger developer base" when referring to javascript developers over python. I wonder if that's true, and by what margin. For what it's worth I would imagine more javascript devs would write plugins for Atom than python developers would write plugins for Sublime Text.

These resources are by no means perfect, but they're the best I can think of off the top of my head:

http://stackoverflow.com/research/developer-survey-2016#tech...

https://github.com/blog/2047-language-trends-on-github

If anyone has anything better, we can refine our collective thinking.

Post reply on HN