(from the slides) >I learned Emacs in September, 1983 >It is now November, 2019 >...that’s over thirty six years! >An amazingly long time. Hmm, I think I learned Emacs around the same time. Yes, sometimes I think it is weird that I'm still using it. I get a lot of pushback when I say that the developer environment hasn't advanced amazingly in all those years. Devs will point to one or more rather small incremental im…
The main reason I quit Emacs was the lack of context and semantically aware code completion and re-factoring tools. Such tools are invaluable productivity boosts for me. I have never gotten that to work in Emacs to a satisfactory degree.
Emacs: The Editor for the Next Forty Years [video]
81–90 of 272 posts
Re: Emacs: The Editor for the Next Forty Years [video]
#82Emacs - the editor that STILL doesn't have a simple way to duplicate the current line?
Or ctrl a ctrl k ctrl k ctrl y (move) ctrl y.
Is it really something that’s so common that it needs a command?
Re: Emacs: The Editor for the Next Forty Years [video]
#83Emacs has really undergone a renaissance in the past decade - magit, LSP, ivy, spacemacs, doom emacs - there have been so many novel new packages and frameworks written by elisp hackers. For such an old editor, the development scene feels incredibly alive.
There may be much going on with emacs, but so far it fails to move ahead. The project is just improving the old strenghts, but not fixing the old fails. And as time moves, they start to hurt more and more and more until they break.
Re: Emacs: The Editor for the Next Forty Years [video]
#84I've been writing Clojure lately but I'm a greybeard (literally) Vi/Vim user. vim-fireplace is nice but I can't help wonder if I'm losing something by not using Emacs. At the same time, Clojure is so wonderfully different from the other languages I know that I don't feel like I have the cycles to learn a new editor at the same time I'm learning a new language. Then again, maybe that's the best time to learn Emacs?
Re: Emacs: The Editor for the Next Forty Years [video]
#85> Emacs support is on by default in MacOS. Given that the author is siding with the usability of macOS with something like Emacs over using it in a GNU/Linux distro is somewhat a surprising discovery and perhaps an insight into the falsehood of having a 'consistent' Linux Desktop; even for power-users like the author. If one has to go through a maze of settings and config files to configure Emacs shortcuts to work 'c…
Re: Emacs: The Editor for the Next Forty Years [video]
#86I have been using Emacs for about 20 years, and I love that you can use it on Windows and Linux and character mode and GUI. Love the programmability and the keyboard shortcuts. Where it sucks though is programming language smarts such as "intellisense" completion. Even something basic such as syntax coloring doesn't work reliably--depends on the mode implementation and most of them are buggy. I get by in other editor…
Auto code completion works pretty much flawlessly for me now.
Re: Emacs: The Editor for the Next Forty Years [video]
#87Re: Emacs: The Editor for the Next Forty Years [video]
#88Oh Emacs. A graybeard I respect got me to try it about 5 years ago. I used to walk by his machine and think "wow, in a movie about a hacker, this is what their computer screen would look like". I also thought Magit was pretty damn cool because it made interacting with Git extremely intuitive (once you're comfortable with Emacs). In the years since first picking up Emacs, I have probably spent 100 hours or more config…
So if you’re not making the world a better place you’re wasting your time? Play is supremely important in almost any activity. Not only is there incredible work insight to be found in activity without goals, but play is fun and good for you.
Re: Emacs: The Editor for the Next Forty Years [video]
#89Oh Emacs. A graybeard I respect got me to try it about 5 years ago. I used to walk by his machine and think "wow, in a movie about a hacker, this is what their computer screen would look like". I also thought Magit was pretty damn cool because it made interacting with Git extremely intuitive (once you're comfortable with Emacs). In the years since first picking up Emacs, I have probably spent 100 hours or more config…
Maybe you went too far, but I think there's also a widespread problem with people not going far enough. I know smart people who have been working in the industry for over a decade who don't bother learning basic text manipulation tools because they look down on the shell and assume they're going to have to switch text editors every few years anyway. Sublime Text, BBEdit, Atom, VSCode -- you only get two or three years with each one, so there's no point learning more than delete, copy, paste, search/replace in file, jump to file, jump to symbol, and if you're really fancy, search/replace in multiple files.
But you can't get past how much of everything we work on is text, no matter how lofty the abstractions it encodes. Munging text takes an inordinate amount of our time. I have seen senior engineers spend an hour writing and debugging scripts to make changes in a big file that they could have made in minutes by using regex-replace or recording a keyboard macro in their editor. Same with basic sed and awk usage. If they can do it by hand in under ten minutes they'll do it that way; otherwise they'll file a ticket and write a script.
I have seen senior engineers painstaking picking through multi-kB json blobs adding line breaks in strategic places to make them readable. ("I used to use this one web site that reformatted JSON for you, but then it shut down, and I always felt nervous about posting internal data to random web sites anyway.") That's an extreme case, but I've seen it more than once, and it's tragic.
I agree it's hard to know ahead of time where to invest your time. One of the best engineers I ever worked with once told me, "The best thing that ever happened to me was that in undergrad I was working for a professor who had all these crazy awk scripts. I spent a whole semester using awk basically every day, even though I hated it." That impressed me —- this was a guy of very impressive theoretical background and incredible ability to design complex systems that worked in simple, reliable ways, and he was talking to me about awk? But it didn't impress me enough, because it was another five years before it sunk in that over the course of my career I had scrolled past an awful lot of simple one or two line awk solutions (on, e.g., Stack Overflow) to get to the solutions I could comprehend -- which were always much more complicated.
When considering how to spend your time, I don't think you should worry about the pits you might fall into. I think you should look at the positive possibilities, the positive possibilities, and try to achieve them. It's possible to be very productive in the terminal and in your editor or IDE without going down too many rabbit holes.