271–280 of 420 posts
Side Note. I recently "invested" my time in moving to i3 and the first week was hard as hell, but now i can't imagine my daily linux life without i3.
Conclusion: As "computer professional" it always pays off to invest in learning your daily-tools properly - Advise from a very wise ex-boss !
Earlier quoted context omitted.
you will never be as fast or flexible as an F1 car F1 race cars are literally the least flexible cars available. They are designed for exactly one type of racing and there is hardly anything you are allowed to configure the way you want. There are cars with higher top speeds than F1 cars, and cars that accelerate faster. A $2k second hand Honda Civic will beat the crap out of an F1 car around a gravel track. F1 cars…
Having worked in F1 that's entirely wrong. A Honda Civic will not even beat a F1 car in the first gear, which goes up to 180km/h. With an unlimited engine of ~24k rpm and a chassis which sucks around each curve nothing can be compared to a F1. If there are curves. On a straight track there are faster cars for about 4 seconds, but then the F1 overtakes. Our usual estimate was that everything in a F1 car was about 1000…
Well, I can't say that I like cars or enjoy driving them, but the biggest advantage of a car compared to a bike is its roof - at least, when it rains.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
- I've used Emacs for 30 years, and I have no intention of ever giving it up - why? I hear it is much easier to quit then vim :)
I gave up emacs by writing my own editor... I realised I could write one in fewer lines than my emacs config...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The script these days is a lot more flexible than it used to be back in the 90's with Visual Studio. It's flexible to cover maybe 90-95% of development needs for the main language targeted. And for those clearly defined use cases, modern IDEs generally fly. Which is far from guaranteed with bespoke configurations (Emacs, Vim).
90-95% of my time is spent working in at least two languages. Usually JavaScript and some backend language, like Go or Python.
Eclipse has Javascript and Python plugins, for example so you can code in Java, Javascript, Python at the same time.
VS Code has a ton of language plugins you can use all at the same time.
IntelliJ has a ton of language plugins you can also use all at the same time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've read a bunch of articles where long time Emacs users are put into a position where they have to achieve something on a tight deadline. Many of them try to muddle through their Rube Goldberg contraption of a local config and under time pressure or advised by someone else they try a modern IDE and suddenly realize why many professional developers use them. They realize that despite the potentially subpar text edit…
I split my time between Emacs, Rider, and VS Code these days. Of those, I spend the most time in VS Code. I have spent way more time fighting against the VS Code configuration than I would like, and even comparing it against all the time I've spent customizing Emacs over my lifetime, I don't think VS Code can come out ahead. All this because I'm not building my project with some build system that has a simple, easy i…
That's because you're supposed to use Visual Studio for everything VS can do at all.
I use Emacs (with Evil) daily, and despite having tried to move to other editors I'm locked into Emacs. Not so much because of the functionality of Emacs itself but because of plugins... First, Emacs has the best Vim compatibility I've seen outside of Vim itself. Visual Studio is probably "good enough" for me on this with the vim plugin, but that 5% difference in compatibility makes a difference in practice. But the…
The diversity in the emacs ecosystem has a hand in this I think. There are so many different ways to switch buffers: vanilla, Ido, Helm, Ivy, and all of the other ones I haven't heard about. This kind of diversity is unseen in other consolidated, centrally managed software ecosystems.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The script these days is a lot more flexible than it used to be back in the 90's with Visual Studio. It's flexible to cover maybe 90-95% of development needs for the main language targeted. And for those clearly defined use cases, modern IDEs generally fly. Which is far from guaranteed with bespoke configurations (Emacs, Vim).
90-95% of my time is spent working in at least two languages. Usually JavaScript and some backend language, like Go or Python.
Emacs shines when using Coq (with Proof General) or Common Lisp or Clojurescript (I guess Clojure too). But for mainstream languages like JS, Go or Python you're better off with something like Code.
I truly believe that its weakness is elisp, it's not hard but at the same time it's not a language you want to learn or spend time with, so of course that means less packages, less support and less interest in customizing it well.
Other than that, I would be quite happy to see a modern version, with support for another scripting language and maybe dropping all these UI features, like menubar, toolbar etc.
If we acknowledge there's a learning curve, the UI buttons are non essential. VSC & others are probably better at this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What is Emacs really? It's a virtual Lisp machine with a standard library for writing graphical text applications. If you substitute Javascript for Lisp, doesn't that describe Visual Studio Code pretty well? So now there's a product that leverages the architectural advantages of Emacs, with modern defaults across the board.
> If you substitute Javascript for Lisp, doesn't that describe Visual Studio Code pretty well? For the most part, except for the fact VSCode is owned by MS and has just enough proprietary code to break a lot of functionality if you try to use it without the proprietary bits.
That's a personal policy choice, not a technical concern.