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

IDEmacs: A Visual Studio Code clone for Emacs

codeberg.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 191 posts

Re: IDEmacs: A Visual Studio Code clone for Emacs

#111

Post by cmrdporcupine »

I've got a whole labouriously created setup for my emacs that is roughly equivalent to my RustRover setup in terms of capabilities (though not [mostly] in terms of keybindings because my fingers are fine with default emacs bindings). And I still barely use it, and I continue to fire up RustRover constantly.

Because it just never feels snappy and fluid and responsive and stable. RustRover is a slow dog at times, but even it outperforms emacs for a lot of things.

The lack of proper multithreading in GNU Emacs is a problem.

Re: IDEmacs: A Visual Studio Code clone for Emacs

#112

Post by skydhash »

torben-friis wrote: post #105
t_mahmood wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, now see, you need to do that for every programming language, or tool for vscode. With Lazyvim you get all at once. And you can ignore many plugins if you want, Sure it's not ide level, but with proper configuration vim/Nvim is much more powerful than vscode. And thanks to Lazyvim, you can set it up faster but Nvim or vim even without plugins can do many things that vscode can not do. So without plugins vscode i…

>Sure it's not ide level, but with proper configuration vim/Nvim is much more powerful than vscode. I’m not arguing against that, I actually moved to neovim and I enjoy it - plus I can now stop worrying that my daily driver will be rug pulled. I just don’t agree with the idea that neither nvim or eMacs have similar levels of ability to onboard new users. Not when grokking something as simple as closing a tab will get…

No one is arguing that. Just that VSCode is also complex too. But it’s just that out of the box, there’s nothing special. Then you add a few tools through plugins and that’s the extent of of workflow customization most people stay at. If you want more, you have to start a whole new project, and the complexity of that is high while the return is not as good as you can have with emacs/vim.

With emacs/vim, getting started is fairly easy (there’s a tutorial). The learning phase is linear, but it’s just practice and using the software. Creating your own tool is very easy as you can jumpstart from where other’s plugins are and add your own stuff. In VSCode, it’s starting from scatch everytime.

Re: IDEmacs: A Visual Studio Code clone for Emacs

#113

Post by forgotpwd16 »

koiueo wrote: post #67
forgotpwd16 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>of an electron application It isn't an Electron application*, that's why GP said native. The EULA part though was probably a block to adoption. *It uses Revery, a, made by OniVim's devs, cross-platform GUI framework (similar to Flutter but build on Reason/OCaml).

Oh, ok, now I'm curious to try it despite EULA (although these days the wide choice of (neo)vim distributions utilizing LSP makes their offering less appealing). Thanks for the clarification. The site doesn't stress the not-electron part enough, maybe that contributed to the failure.

Should've probably mentioned it before but it actually used a dual-license model by having an MIT version that lagged behind upstream for 18 months (could be found in oni2-mit repo). During last month when development stopped it was fully re-licensed under MIT (hence oni2-mit repo no longer exists).

Re: IDEmacs: A Visual Studio Code clone for Emacs

#114

Post by anon291 »

charcircuit wrote: post #58
anon291 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no better UI for text editing that I have ever come across. I'm not sure why so many people are resistant to the idea that emacs has the correct answer to most UI issues. More programs would stand to take lessons from emacs. Emacs is, in its own right, a very successful piece of software. When eclipse was a thing everyone was saying how great it was vs emacs. But eclipse is gone (I think?) and emacs is still…

>But eclipse is gone (I think?) and emacs is still GOATed. The 2024 stack overflow developer survey [0] puts Eclipse at over double Emac's market share. If Eclipse is gone, then Emacs is double gone. Emacs struggles to attract and retain new users. This advice is not calling existing Emacs users deprived. It's rooted from the bad defaults giving new users a bad impression of Emac's viability because the default is so…

> If emacs built out proper telemtry they could actually track how the defaults they provide affect the new user experience in order for them to optimize it and figure out what users are looking for.

I can't tell if this is an attempt at humor or something people actually believe

Re: IDEmacs: A Visual Studio Code clone for Emacs

#116

Post by charcircuit »

imiric wrote: post #63
charcircuit wrote: post #9

I would really like to see this kind of work be done upstream. Emacs still looks the same as it did decades ago despite other editors advancing and becoming more user friendly.

I didn't downvote you, but you have a misconception. There's no such thing as an Emacs "look". Its appearance, UI and UX, are wildly different depending on how the user wants it to look and behave. Considering that it is a very configurable system that happens to expose building blocks for a text editor, every Emacs installation is thus different from another. We could say that the Emacs GUI toolkit and perhaps its i…

My comment is discussing the defaults. Most users will use the defaults and not customize their editor, especially if they are just using it for the first time. The defaults are important.

The single threaded issue is a problem, but one that can be somewhat worked around. I consider emac's bad deals an existential issue that significantly hurts adoption.

Re: IDEmacs: A Visual Studio Code clone for Emacs

#117

Post by jlarocco »

Next up, how to make your Ferrari into a Fiero clone.

Seriously, though, this seems kind of counterproductive. The power of Org mode and some of the other tools in Emacs comes from being integrated into the rest of Emacs and the synergies from Emacs idioms and concepts working everywhere in Emacs.

Just my opinion, but the time spent learning this front end would be better spent just learning the Emacs UI. It's really not that difficult, and pretending you can't learn it just makes it more difficult in the long run.

Re: IDEmacs: A Visual Studio Code clone for Emacs

#118

Post by PessimalDecimal »

musebox35 wrote: post #99

As a 15+ years emacs user the only item on my wishlist is client-server remote editing mode similar to that of vs code. Then I can go back to using emacs on cloud VMs. Does anyone know a solution to this that works as good as VS Code even when your latency is high? Hopefully, I will be pissed off with all the weird configuration flags of VS Code enough to write one myself ;-) To be fair its python integration is quit…

Two approaches might work here:

  1) Run Emacs on your local machine and use Tramp to edit the remote files

  2) Run Emacs on the remote machine with the files you're editing. This likely means running in the terminal itself (emacs -nw  or requivalently emacs -t).

Re: IDEmacs: A Visual Studio Code clone for Emacs

#119

Post by jrm4 »

pronik wrote: post #74

Whoever thinks that VSCode does not have any learning curve or is somehow magically easy, needs to take a reality check, that thing is overwhelming with all its popups, hovers, sidebars etc. beyond all reason when you first run it (and later too). I'm an Emacs user and I don't in any way support the notion it's somehow easy or intuitively workable, it's most definitely not and never has been. I just think that VSCode…

Here's the thing (as someone who did Emacs for a year and then gave it up)

The possibility and ease of interoperability with other general program styles is far more important that the idea is given.

Look, there are too many other good tools out there that do things like have a standard file picker, use CUA bindings etc. This is primarily why I left Emacs for non programmy things (and am happier with a hacked zim-wiki, though I imagine obsidian et al might work too)

Re: IDEmacs: A Visual Studio Code clone for Emacs

#120

Post by slaymaker1907 »

skydhash wrote: post #79
torben-friis wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every piece of software that’s effectively a professional workbench (IDEs, DAWs, video editing, etc) is going to have some complexity. I can’t imagine the argument that vscode’s level of complexity is even in the same order of magnitude as vim or eMacs though. A 2 minute tutorial or half an hour or fiddling will get you sorted with vscode, I needed a full ebook for neovim.

VSCode rely on familiar pattern and UX to let you get started easily. But out of the box, it's pretty much notepad level. Vim and Emacs start from the premises that you need powerful tools. And they give them to you alongside the possibility to integrate external tools easily with the editor workflow. With VSCode any integration needs to be a full project. With emacs and vims, it's a few lines of config.

You absolutely don't need extensions for JS development. It is absolutely NOT notepad level. In my experience with beginners, installing an extension is also incredibly easy compared to getting them to edit some vim/emacs config.
Post reply on HN