How I am deeply integrating Emacs

> A lot of people hate that

It seems a curious attitude for a developer, though. My curiosity about how things work and the joy I get when I make a computer do the specific thing I want it to do for me are the reasons I program for a living.

The bit about enabling org capture from "outside" Emacs is really interesting. It's been so important for me to have a system that enables me to make notes, todos etc. with extremely low friction. At any time, without my hands leaving the keyboard, I can take a note that is either directly attached to what I'm currently working on, arbitrarily file it somewhere if I know where it should go, or just let it go into the general inbox (the other part of the system is actually getting to those things in the inbox at some point). Up until this point I have had to be "in" Emacs, though, which accounts for most of my time, but not all.

This may sound strange, but I actually think we need just ... one editor.

Now, this is not a "we need to favour vim over emacs". I think this is a stupid war, the vim versus emacs war.

What I mean is ... basically most editors do almost the same exact thing. They look at some buffer for a file and help the user modify this. There is a finite number of operations possible. Why do people keep on re-implementing basic things here? Why can it not be solved once and for all and then everyone uses that implementation?

We really should have that; and then people can decide ON THEIR OWN what kind of editor they want to use. Many years ago I started with crimson editor as my main editor on windows. I have since then hopped to many other editors. My favourite one was oldschool bluefish in gtk2. I am not saying it was perfect, but I found it much easier to go on my poor brain than e. g. remembering all vim shortcuts. But, it would need xorg + gtk2, so if that is not available, then I can not edit things - that's bad. That was (and still is) also one reason why I use e. g. nano. But this in turn requires ncurses and I hate ncurses with a passion (nano is great though, I can recommend it for quick ad-hoc editing; for larger things it is not quite as good, but if you have to just change some value in a config file, nano is really great).

Even then I used only like 20% of what bluefish offered (the newer bluefish releases are also nowhere near as good as the old releases, also because GTK really sucks nowadays). I'd like to cherry-pick on my editor and declare what I want it to be, without needing to implement everything on my own. Why can't we transition into this? Why do we need to reimplement everything almost from scratch? That just makes no sense to me.

We live in the age where AI autogenerates code (which they heavily drew from stealing people's code). Why can't AI autogenerate the best, most perfect editor/IDE?

Completely agree. At the same time, I'd wager a good chunk of developers isn't really in it for a love of computers and tinkering. Not a bad thing per se, just my observation.

> A lot of people hate that, they want a tool that has all relevant to their tasks front and center [...]

A lot of people don't even know how to use their tools properly. I remember when I was teaching a number of Perl courses to programmers, they where joking about me using emacs while they where using vi or vim.

But while I watched them while they did their exercises, I constantly heard the "bing" sound when the cursor hit the end of the line. Why? Because they pressed the cursor key and waited for the cursor to travel to the end of the line, then chynged to insert mode to append stuff.

Even I, a humble emacs user, knew that there was a vi command to jump to the end of the line and append.