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

Emacs Bedrock: A minimal Emacs starter kit

sr.ht

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 132 posts

Re: Emacs Bedrock: A minimal Emacs starter kit

#121

Post by lycopodiopsida »

lproven wrote: post #119
lycopodiopsida wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The millions of unknowing CUA users don't know or use any keybindings - they just click, scroll and select with a mouse. Arguably, it is also what made CUA the worst option - there is just no selection pressure from users, no complains is something is not working properly. Vim keybindings are so well supported compared to the share of users because vim users care . I would also agree, that vim keybindings shine for p…

Something which is the default for basically every keyboard-driven GUI in the world isn't dead by any reckoning.

shrug same story as with POSIX - something so minimal in features and inconsistent between implementations can only work as a lowest common denominator and is without any practical meaning. Call it a victim of own success, it won't change much in practice.

Re: Emacs Bedrock: A minimal Emacs starter kit

#123

Post by billfruit »

G3rn0ti wrote: post #117
billfruit wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not built in, eglot is only an LSP client, it requires a LSP server to function which is not included with Emacs.

See my comment above. LSP servers are complicated beasts coming with a lot of specific dependencies. It is simply impossible to ship all available language servers together with Emacs. Even VSCode does not do it. For popular languages it downloads them automatically for you. But this is exactly what "lsp-mode" (the alternative to "eglot.el") does, too [1]. If you are an expert in a specific language it also should no…

Yes it can be set up, but my point was precisely that it(LSP servers for popular languages) is not baked into Emacs, instead making them complicated external dependencies necessary to be set up to get a basic IDE functionality of code completion working.

Code completion works out of the box for example in IntelliJ for example without needing to download and install further packages.

The tree sitter approach does sound something along in that direction, that should bode well if it works out.

Re: Emacs Bedrock: A minimal Emacs starter kit

#124

Post by lproven »

lycopodiopsida wrote: post #121
lproven wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something which is the default for basically every keyboard-driven GUI in the world isn't dead by any reckoning.

shrug same story as with POSIX - something so minimal in features and inconsistent between implementations can only work as a lowest common denominator and is without any practical meaning. Call it a victim of own success, it won't change much in practice.

I disagree.

Also, POSIX is from some 30+ years ago now. It's been replaced with the Single Unix Specification and even now there are a dozen odd certified compliant OSes, and hundreds more that could be but haven't bothered. Several Linux distros have passed, meaning that Linux is UNIX now.

POSIX/the SUS is very useful. There are more OSes that can pass now than when the commercial stuff was at its peak.

And there are de facto standards that are more use. A mate of mine jokes that the stable Linux app API is Win32 because WINE on Linux is now more compatible across more versions than any 1 distro's own packages over decades, and more compatible on more platforms than Windows itself.

But saying that, Linux itself is an ABI now, and you can successfully run Linux binaries, without Linux itself being present, on Windows, on FreeBSD, on Solaris/Illumos and I suspect on other OSes as well.

So, you are free to mock POSIX and Linux compatibility, but in real life, it's true and it is valid and it works and people pay for this. It is real and it is useful.

Similarly, stick J Random Punter in front of a text editor on Windows, macOS, or any xNix with a GUI, and they will be able to edit some text, cut and paste, and save it.

Put them in front of Vim or Emacs, and they won't.

For me, I don't give an electronic sausage how much use they are for a skilled programmer. That 2-para definition there is the acid test. Any editor that fails it can GTFO and DIAF.

This, to Vim heads and Emacs gurus, is a weird and heretical thought.

Tough. I have nearly 40 years experience in this stuff, across more OSes than just about any other living human I know could even _name_, and I absolutely stand by it.

There is a standard. Meet it, or die.

Re: Emacs Bedrock: A minimal Emacs starter kit

#125

Post by lenkite »

not_kurt_godel wrote: post #96
G3rn0ti wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, Emacs is all about choice and flexibility -- not 1-click convenience. If you do not want to spend some time learning your tool, it's definitely not for you. I respect that. See, if you hate "lsp-mode" and "lsp-ui" you can go for the more minimal "eglot.el". Similarly, you can exchange "company.el" with "corfu.el" if you prefer the latter. It's all about freedom of choice. Emacs means to many people different th…

Lol at the arrogance of thinking I do not take the time to learn or customize my tools while you advocate usage of a development environment that objectively lacks essential features for efficient professional programming such as functional semantic code search and navigation

I am not even an emacs user yet know it has semantic code search and navigations. Sure you gottu install a couple of packages, but whats the big deal ?

Re: Emacs Bedrock: A minimal Emacs starter kit

#126

Post by lycopodiopsida »

lproven wrote: post #124
lycopodiopsida wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

shrug same story as with POSIX - something so minimal in features and inconsistent between implementations can only work as a lowest common denominator and is without any practical meaning. Call it a victim of own success, it won't change much in practice.

I disagree. Also, POSIX is from some 30+ years ago now. It's been replaced with the Single Unix Specification and even now there are a dozen odd certified compliant OSes, and hundreds more that could be but haven't bothered. Several Linux distros have passed, meaning that Linux is UNIX now. POSIX/the SUS is very useful. There are more OSes that can pass now than when the commercial stuff was at its peak. And there ar…

Why die, vim is thriving and in a much better shape than CUA(I wont repeat myself). And no, there is no standard for CUA, only very loose conventions which are largely inconsistent. On macos in editors and text entry fields I have a better luck with readline keybindings than with CUA and it says a lot about how much of a “standard” it is.

So, why again should emacs care about it? There is no heresy, vim and emacs gurus just do not care, this ship has sailed long time ago. Today across every editor I have used in past 20 years (vim, Idea, emacs, VSCode) and across 3 operating systems vim keybindings are the most consistent thing. CUA is laughable, not only does the overlap not allow to work with text effectively, it is also completely inconsistent, such as usage of cmd as modificator in macos. You may stomp with your feet about it, but people will not care more. If anything, these highly specialized editors in their niches will survive any mouse-driven fad (and let is be honest here, CUA-influenced editors are all mouse-driven). So, go emacs, go vim, you are doing everything right.

Re: Emacs Bedrock: A minimal Emacs starter kit

#127

Post by viksit »

G3rn0ti wrote: post #26
viksit wrote: post #10

yes But can someone please tell me how to get typescript auto complete like vscode (eg auto import, linting) that also works for jsx. running tests. oh and simple auto complete. i couldn’t get that to work with https://github.com/viksit/prelude/blob/master/init.el as someone else said - need to get work done :))

For good autocompletion you‘ll need both an autocompletion framework and a language server client. I am still using „lsp-mode“ as a language server client which works well for me and it comes with „company-mode“ integration for good autocompletion: https://emacs-lsp.github.io/lsp-mode/page/lsp-typescript/ Later that day I can paste you the relevant lines out of my init.el. Starting with Emacs 29 you can also use the…

omg you may be the most helpful answer i ever got on hn.

will check this out this week thank you!

Re: Emacs Bedrock: A minimal Emacs starter kit

#128

Post by hyperman1 »

geokon wrote: post #22

It seems like a list of nice, but most are kinda opinionated non-essential tweaks (cua-mode) Well this will have the greybeards frothing at the mouth :) that said, `cua-mode` is kinda terrible/half-assed b/c it implements a tiny fraction of what I think most people would consider "CUA". If you want a real CUA-mode use `ergoemacs`. Then Emacs will start to behave like every other GUI since the last mass extinction. It…

Thanks for the ergoemacs hint. I was looking for a linux notepad++ replacement, and kate notepadqq vscode nano all have downsides.

While I used to like xemacs back in the day, neither emacs nor vim really clicked, the basics are just to alien.

This brings emacs back to the list of usable options.

Re: Emacs Bedrock: A minimal Emacs starter kit

#129

Post by schmooser »

SloopJon wrote: post #21
ljm wrote: post #3

If you’re running emacs 29+ I posit you get less value out of a starter kit or framework than beforehand. Treesitter is baked in for syntax, eglot is baked in for language servers (intellisense), project and tab-bar give you scoped workspaces. use-package is baked in for downloading and configuring dependencies. Modus-themes are also built in now, so you can use modus-operandi and modus-vivendi out of the box. Two in…

I use a mostly vanilla Emacs on macOS from emacsforosx.com, and I am definitely a laggard when it comes to adopting some of these modern features. I'd love to use eglot to make Emacs as smart as VS Code, but it takes some doing, so I'm still leaning on a TAGS file for navigation. Meanwhile, each new version seems to break something in my crusty old .emacs file. My latest frustration is that drag and drop stopped work…

On macOS try emacs-mac-port, it has many goodies comparing to emacsformacos.com: - The only Emacs that works with window managers, I use Magnet.app to resize windows using shortcuts - Integration with other macOS apps, like Tip.app[1], so selection (region) in Emacs is recognised by macOS and sent to Tip.app as stdin

From downsides, it won't compile with xwidgets support (webkit).

[1]: https://github.com/tanin47/tip

Re: Emacs Bedrock: A minimal Emacs starter kit

#130

Post by schmooser »

gpderetta wrote: post #48
ljm wrote: post #3

If you’re running emacs 29+ I posit you get less value out of a starter kit or framework than beforehand. Treesitter is baked in for syntax, eglot is baked in for language servers (intellisense), project and tab-bar give you scoped workspaces. use-package is baked in for downloading and configuring dependencies. Modus-themes are also built in now, so you can use modus-operandi and modus-vivendi out of the box. Two in…

Thanks for the pointer to modus-theme. Vivendi-tinted is very close to what I normally run. Time to update to 29 and get rid of more customisation!

Emacs 29 is bundled with version of modus-themes that doesn't include tinted variants, you need to install them from Elpa.
Post reply on HN