71–80 of 220 posts
I think Helix does a lot right on the "initial configuration" front. It comes with LSP and treesitter configured out of the box. Neovim on the other hand is heavily customizable, but you also have to do this for awesome functionality
For people interested in Helix, I've done a small video: https://youtu.be/9Zj-wiQ9_Xw
I will never understand why people choose VSCode/Jetbrains over a terminal based editor. I can edit the kernel with clangd and get hover reference, autocomplete, go to def, ref, dec, smart refactor, and that's on top of being able to easily jump and fix lint/bugs using Vim's already great support for parsing compiler errors. With term added (which is a core Vim feature) it also has excellent support for gdb debugging…
Same reaction but in the opposite direction. I still do not understand why some people are that obsessed to dedicate a large amount of time learning a software that will sometimes make their life a tiny bit easier in rare edge cases. Every time I try to learn how to use Vim as an IDE, I just end up massively overwhelmed and never even come close to reach a fraction of my productivity on VSCode. The fact I cannot see…
> it is intensely gratifying to build and improve the world around you.
For many of us, we expect we will be spending a significant chunk of our lives in the text editor.
Picking a dumb, inert, fixed, limited text editor is an apalling choice to some, versus picking something that has rich means of working the system (text objects, spellcrafting on the fly!!!) and infinite possibility (that flexible configuring, leader keys of possibilities). Picking a starting point where more is possible, where building & growing our world can be done- it's a path of lifelong struggle, but immense lifelong gratification, one where we will see our world florusihing and ourselves growing within in.
I personally resist a lot of the configuring & addition of plugins, am only an ok advanced vim user. But Im pretty ok at writing macros when i have a shitty chore, i make use of registers to handle reusable text- I appreciate having something much closer to a programming language than a input box at my back, and i keep slowly improving.
I think Helix does a lot right on the "initial configuration" front. It comes with LSP and treesitter configured out of the box. Neovim on the other hand is heavily customizable, but you also have to do this for awesome functionality
You can get nvim packaged up with goodies out of the box with something like Lunarvim.
Defaults matter
I will never understand why people choose VSCode/Jetbrains over a terminal based editor. I can edit the kernel with clangd and get hover reference, autocomplete, go to def, ref, dec, smart refactor, and that's on top of being able to easily jump and fix lint/bugs using Vim's already great support for parsing compiler errors. With term added (which is a core Vim feature) it also has excellent support for gdb debugging…
I could ask the opposite: why do people choose terminal vim when you can easily add nvim integration to editors like VSCode and get 98-100% of what vim gives you along with much easier configuration of all those extras you mention like autocomplete, hover reference, refactor, etc.? That's a bit of an overstatement, because I really do love vim/nvim and nvim integration isn't that good, but the fact is that adding a f…
After about a week of using vim it clicked and I knew I couldn't go back to Sublime Text.
As for VS Code, I do everything I can to keep Microsoft products out of my life.
I will never understand why people choose VSCode/Jetbrains over a terminal based editor. I can edit the kernel with clangd and get hover reference, autocomplete, go to def, ref, dec, smart refactor, and that's on top of being able to easily jump and fix lint/bugs using Vim's already great support for parsing compiler errors. With term added (which is a core Vim feature) it also has excellent support for gdb debugging…
> I will never understand why people choose VSCode/Jetbrains over a terminal based editor. I don't want to use my valuable time learning how to get vim working in some super-optimal way that's hypothetically going to improve my productivity by 1%. JetBrains consistently works well enough for me that I'm not going to bother switching. 90% of my life is spent thinking about how to solve the problem so the editor is not…
In the same time period, I've watched plenty of my cohort jump between IDEs and "modern" editors as they come and go (jetbrains, visual studio, textmate, sublime text, vscode, the various storm ides, etc etc). They all have to put time and effort into getting comfortable and proficient in each of these environments. That time adds up to be more than my initial vim investment.
Now I'm one of those folks that likes to master my tools and craft my own tools as well, so I've continued to invest time in my vim mastery. The same argument applies here too: that time is cumulatively increasing my skill at the tool rather than getting to the same point with various tools (cf the old interviewing dilemma: does this person have 5 years of experience or 1 year of experience 5 times). It means that some years I don't spend any time thinking about my vim setup, and other years I'll throw a few hours at it - importantly, this happens when I want not when the tool decides to release a new version that breaks things, not when theres suddenly a new great thing I have to use to keep up.
In summary - from a time/effort efficiency point of view for the course of a career: vim wins because the tool was there when I started, and its still here long after the "better" alternatives have come and gone (or faded into obscurity).
Does any one have any advice for running neo vim on a centos host without admin to install it. (Short of hunting down all the source packages for dependencies and compiling)
I will never understand why people choose VSCode/Jetbrains over a terminal based editor. I can edit the kernel with clangd and get hover reference, autocomplete, go to def, ref, dec, smart refactor, and that's on top of being able to easily jump and fix lint/bugs using Vim's already great support for parsing compiler errors. With term added (which is a core Vim feature) it also has excellent support for gdb debugging…
> I will never understand why people choose VSCode/Jetbrains over a terminal based editor. I don't want to use my valuable time learning how to get vim working in some super-optimal way that's hypothetically going to improve my productivity by 1%. JetBrains consistently works well enough for me that I'm not going to bother switching. 90% of my life is spent thinking about how to solve the problem so the editor is not…
A tool that can last a lifetime and be used for any programming language at that.
It's just a trade-off between optimizing for the short-term or the long-term.
I will never understand why people choose VSCode/Jetbrains over a terminal based editor. I can edit the kernel with clangd and get hover reference, autocomplete, go to def, ref, dec, smart refactor, and that's on top of being able to easily jump and fix lint/bugs using Vim's already great support for parsing compiler errors. With term added (which is a core Vim feature) it also has excellent support for gdb debugging…
> I will never understand why people choose VSCode/Jetbrains over a terminal based editor. I don't want to use my valuable time learning how to get vim working in some super-optimal way that's hypothetically going to improve my productivity by 1%. JetBrains consistently works well enough for me that I'm not going to bother switching. 90% of my life is spent thinking about how to solve the problem so the editor is not…
People who have tried both vim and nvim: - I have a theory that using `coc.nvim` is still the superior solution even compared to a native LSP. Why? Cause we can siphon from the huge man-hours of development and polish that M$ has put on VSCode. Every time they tweak VSCode, we at downstream, enjoy the benefits. Am I wrong in my assessment? - Vim's regexp-based syntax highlighting is annoying. So I think nvim+tree-sit…
You have to assemble more plugins to recreate the functionality coc provides as a whole and the documentation on the config process is sparse (as of my last attempt to use it). I’m also probably a weird edge case in that my primary use case is writing Powershell. Coc just works and getting native LSP configured and working requires more time than I’ve been willing to give it.
I think Helix does a lot right on the "initial configuration" front. It comes with LSP and treesitter configured out of the box. Neovim on the other hand is heavily customizable, but you also have to do this for awesome functionality