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

Let's just use Emacs

beastwithin.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 169 posts

Re: Let's just use Emacs

#81

Post by shubble »

urlwolf wrote: post #62

For those who prefer a language with namespaces (python) sublime editor is a good modern alternative.

I've been using emacs for a few months now (it's surprisingly good), and am starting to run into wanting to do little modifications. Speaking as a non-lisper, I really wish a rewrite existed in a more modern language. I don't wanna start an argument about lisp here but there is a reason people don't use it for major developments, and it's not the performance. But it would be unfair not to point out that you can extend emacs in a variety of languages including python. Its just a bit messier.

Re: Let's just use Emacs

#82

Post by technomancy »

jlongster wrote: post #79

I resonate somewhat with the gripes about Emacs' crustiness. But on the other hand, I don't understand the complaints about it being ugly. I haven't heard that for a while. I'd like to think that my Emacs is quite pretty: http://jlongster.com/s/emacs.png There are things Emacs can do which VIM will never do. And vice-versa. They are separate editors embracing separate philosophies. Lastly, keep in mind that this is 4…

I think most of the "ugly" gripes come from people who either don't know how to change the font or haven't bothered to turn the tool bar off.

Re: Let's just use Emacs

#83

Post by technomancy »

astine wrote: post #37
parfe wrote: post #20

I use Emacs for coding, wanderlust mail, rcirc and jabber-el. All which are provided as packages in the distros I run. I've been trying to get into clojure which entails installing clojure-mode, swank-clojure, leiningen (which brings the pain of maven) and slime. This is where emacs has always broken down for me. Once I step outside the distro provided packages I find broken tutorials, unspecific versions, and instru…

Whenever installing software for Emacs, it's usually worth checking ELPA http://tromey.com/elpa/ (which comes installed on Emacs by default now,) to see if the package is there already. The ELPA provide both slime and clojure-mode and they work out of the box with swank-clojure. You'll still need to install Leiningen/Cake with swank-clojure separately, but there isn't much Emacs can do to help there.

ELPA is no longer accepting new uploads; the maintainer has requested that everyone switch to Marmalade.

Re: Let's just use Emacs

#84

Post by technomancy »

parfe wrote: post #38
astine wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whenever installing software for Emacs, it's usually worth checking ELPA http://tromey.com/elpa/ (which comes installed on Emacs by default now,) to see if the package is there already. The ELPA provide both slime and clojure-mode and they work out of the box with swank-clojure. You'll still need to install Leiningen/Cake with swank-clojure separately, but there isn't much Emacs can do to help there.

Ah, but now you're not following the instructions provided by swank clojure which says to use marmalade (which is an elpa extension/replacement/clone/additional repository?) The clojure-mode available through elpa ( clojure-mode 1.7.x) is not new enough to deal with swank-clojure which needs 1.9.x (specifically I was after M-x clojure-jack-in) Plus, the elpa instructions don't include emacs23 because it allegedly com…

package.el is included in Emacs 24, not 23.

Once that has had a stable release, this will become a lot easier. In the mean time, the link to package.el for Emacs 23 is right at the top of marmalade-repo.org: http://bit.ly/pkg-el23

Re: Let's just use Emacs

#85

Post by [deleted] »

tedunangst wrote: post #78
raganwald wrote: post #18

Articles about why anything you can do in a "simpler" text editor can and should be done in emacs strongly resemble articles about why anything you can do in a less powerful programming language can and should be done in Lisp. I don't think it's a coïncidence.

I'm not sure if you're making a general point, but I don't think it's universally true. Anything you can do on a netbook can be done faster and more accurately on a supercomputer. Working backwards from why we don't all use supercomputers, we can probably figure out why not everyone uses lisp and emacs.

[deleted]

Re: Let's just use Emacs

#86

Post by technomancy »

GrooveStomp wrote: post #57
parfe wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, but now you're not following the instructions provided by swank clojure which says to use marmalade (which is an elpa extension/replacement/clone/additional repository?) The clojure-mode available through elpa ( clojure-mode 1.7.x) is not new enough to deal with swank-clojure which needs 1.9.x (specifically I was after M-x clojure-jack-in) Plus, the elpa instructions don't include emacs23 because it allegedly com…

I can't say that I've run into this exact issue, or even exactly what the issues have been that I've run into with Emacs, but I know I've spent many hours reading instructions, following tutorials and generally just trying to get a basic emacs/lisp setup running. It's really difficult to do. I think I had a partially working Clojure setup, but then I tried to make it support Common Lisp in addition, and things comple…

> I think I had a partially working Clojure setup, but then I tried to make it support Common Lisp in addition, and things completely broke down.

This is due to the SLIME developers' insistence on making everyone run from CVS trunk. I wish I were joking, but they really seem to have no interest in creating stable release packages, so I have to go in and try to make it work without their cooperation.

Re: Let's just use Emacs

#87

Post by eru »

brewski wrote: post #35
evangineer wrote: post #5

tl;dr Use Emacs 23 to create a distraction-free writing environment using org-mode, darkroom-mode & markdown-mode.

For linux environments, instead of darkroom-mode you can put this in your .emacs file to toggle fullscreen: ;;; Fullscreen (defun switch-full-screen () (interactive) (shell-command "wmctrl -r :ACTIVE: -btoggle,fullscreen")) (global-set-key (kbd " ") 'switch-full-screen)

You can also start using xmonad.

Re: Let's just use Emacs

#88

Post by technomancy »

evangineer wrote: post #73
parfe wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, you're right. I was confused by the ELPA page which lists instructions only for emacs 21 and 22, but says elpa will be included in the next version of Emacs. (edit: now I can't find where I read this. I'm incredibly confused.) Now I'm confused about how my other installs have it working.

I've suffered from the same confusion, on finding that ELPA no longer worked for me with Aquamacs 2.0, I tried using the Marmalade repo with no joy. Quite frustrating as I was using ELPA in my fork of the Aquamacs Emacs Starter Kit: https://github.com/evangineer/aquamacs-emacs-starter-kit

FWIW, things go a lot more smoothly if you use GNU Emacs rather than a fork. For most elisp maintainers it's not even possible to test with Aquamacs.

Re: Let's just use Emacs

#89

Post by raganwald »

akkartik wrote: post #80
raganwald wrote: post #18

Articles about why anything you can do in a "simpler" text editor can and should be done in emacs strongly resemble articles about why anything you can do in a less powerful programming language can and should be done in Lisp. I don't think it's a coïncidence.

The title raised my hackles as well, but it turned out to be a fun, un-dogmatic read with nothing to do with the editor wars. Upvoted. Or perhaps it was just that he didn't bash my favorite editor :)

I though the article was fun and informative, but I'll stop short of saying that a post wherein the author questions why people pay for editors that do less than emacs has "nothing to do with the editor wars." I agree that it has nothing to do with the One-True-Editor war between emacs and vim users :-)

Re: Let's just use Emacs

#90

Post by swannodette »

raganwald wrote: post #18

Articles about why anything you can do in a "simpler" text editor can and should be done in emacs strongly resemble articles about why anything you can do in a less powerful programming language can and should be done in Lisp. I don't think it's a coïncidence.

  Simple text editor = simple + powerful
  Emacs = complex + powerful
  Lisp = simple + powerful
  Blub = complex + powerful
Given this your association doesn't make much sense.

I think most people prefer simple + powerful. And this isn't black and white - Blub can often be simpler for X simple task. However the real yard stick is whether as your problem domain gets more complex does Blub suddenly lose its veneer of simplicity?

I always bring up Alan Kay in these kind of threads but his observations are always so damn salient - agglutinative PLs (features) vs style PLs (simple principles).

Post reply on HN