Thoughts on editors (Emacs in particular) • Hacker News Board

Re: Thoughts on editors (Emacs in particular)

#11

Post by mdakin » Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 10:20 PM UTC

nostrademons wrote: post #9

mdakin wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither choice matters much. Smart, flexible people tend to get the job done one way or another. If a bottleneck becomes apparent they work around it: revise, redesign, change languages, tools, editors as necessary. Historically a lot of useless dogma and arguments have surrounded the choice of editor. There is a desire to avoid that sort of low-quality discussion.

Depends. Smart, flexible people can get the job done with any tool as long as that tool is "good enough" . However, a bad tool will cripple even a good programmer. The Emacs/vi/IntelliJ/Eclipse/Netbeans/Kate/jEdit/TextPad debate is meaningless, because all the above choices are "good enough". However, a decent programmer's productivity will be severely hampered by Notepad. Similarly, the Rails/Django/Pylons debate is…

I understand what you're saying but I think you're missing my point. If any tool was empirically "not good enough" or "crippling" it would be abandoned and the show would go on. The focus is on the end result. The SFP gets there one way or another.

Re: Thoughts on editors (Emacs in particular)

#12

Post by nirs » Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 10:24 PM UTC

ivankirigin wrote: post #2

The Hacker News community would do well to minimize discussions about optimal editors. It just isn't that interesting or important.

Of course it is interesting - this is your major tool. Photographers are obsessed with cameras, programmers with editors...

Re: Thoughts on editors (Emacs in particular)

#13

Post by bluishgreen » Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 10:53 PM UTC

nirs wrote: post #12

ivankirigin wrote: post #2

The Hacker News community would do well to minimize discussions about optimal editors. It just isn't that interesting or important.

Of course it is interesting - this is your major tool. Photographers are obsessed with cameras, programmers with editors...

I do quiet a bit of photography, imho photographers should not be obsessed with camera. and that further implies that this is not a good explanation for programmers to be obsessed with editors. The key word is "obsessed". You should definitely think about it. But save the obsession for other important things.

Re: Thoughts on editors (Emacs in particular)

#14

Post by Goladus » Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 10:55 PM UTC

nostrademons wrote: post #9

mdakin wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither choice matters much. Smart, flexible people tend to get the job done one way or another. If a bottleneck becomes apparent they work around it: revise, redesign, change languages, tools, editors as necessary. Historically a lot of useless dogma and arguments have surrounded the choice of editor. There is a desire to avoid that sort of low-quality discussion.

Depends. Smart, flexible people can get the job done with any tool as long as that tool is "good enough" . However, a bad tool will cripple even a good programmer. The Emacs/vi/IntelliJ/Eclipse/Netbeans/Kate/jEdit/TextPad debate is meaningless, because all the above choices are "good enough". However, a decent programmer's productivity will be severely hampered by Notepad. Similarly, the Rails/Django/Pylons debate is…

The Emacs/vi/IntelliJ/Eclipse/Netbeans/Kate/jEdit/TextPad debate is meaningless

To the extent that it becomes a religious discussion about which one is the best, which happens all the time, I think you're right. However, the exchange of ideas that results can be meaningful. This is especially true of emacs, since there's so much room to use it creatively, but is applicable to all those other editors as well.

Re: Thoughts on editors (Emacs in particular)

#15

Post by mdakin » Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 11:01 PM UTC

nirs wrote: post #12

ivankirigin wrote: post #2

The Hacker News community would do well to minimize discussions about optimal editors. It just isn't that interesting or important.

Of course it is interesting - this is your major tool. Photographers are obsessed with cameras, programmers with editors...

Such people are properly known as "camera fondlers". [1] Only some of them are actually photographers.

[1] http://nemeng.com/leica/002e.shtml

Re: Thoughts on editors (Emacs in particular)

#16

Post by mdakin » Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 11:03 PM UTC

Goladus wrote: post #14

nostrademons wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends. Smart, flexible people can get the job done with any tool as long as that tool is "good enough" . However, a bad tool will cripple even a good programmer. The Emacs/vi/IntelliJ/Eclipse/Netbeans/Kate/jEdit/TextPad debate is meaningless, because all the above choices are "good enough". However, a decent programmer's productivity will be severely hampered by Notepad. Similarly, the Rails/Django/Pylons debate is…

The Emacs/vi/IntelliJ/Eclipse/Netbeans/Kate/jEdit/TextPad debate is meaningless To the extent that it becomes a religious discussion about which one is the best, which happens all the time, I think you're right. However, the exchange of ideas that results can be meaningful. This is especially true of emacs, since there's so much room to use it creatively, but is applicable to all those other editors as well.

Agreed. Exchange of ideas is valuable, esp. w.r.t. emacs.

Re: Thoughts on editors (Emacs in particular)

#17

Post by nostrademons » Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 11:23 PM UTC

mdakin wrote: post #11

nostrademons wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends. Smart, flexible people can get the job done with any tool as long as that tool is "good enough" . However, a bad tool will cripple even a good programmer. The Emacs/vi/IntelliJ/Eclipse/Netbeans/Kate/jEdit/TextPad debate is meaningless, because all the above choices are "good enough". However, a decent programmer's productivity will be severely hampered by Notepad. Similarly, the Rails/Django/Pylons debate is…

I understand what you're saying but I think you're missing my point. If any tool was empirically "not good enough" or "crippling" it would be abandoned and the show would go on. The focus is on the end result. The SFP gets there one way or another.

Heh, you'd be surprised at how many businesses cling to crippling tools because management has made their decision and refuses to abandon it. Moreso with languages than with editors, though I know of companies that standardize on a toolset (often one that's not top-notch, though I don't know of any that would mandate something as ridiculous as Notepad) and refuse to let you use anything other than that. Sometimes customers mandate certain technology choices too - I know of one government-sponsored project where they had to use Java/EJB even though virtually every engineer in the company thought it was a terrible choice.

Re: Thoughts on editors (Emacs in particular)

#18

Post by jsrfded » Thu, Sep 13, 2007, 12:10 AM UTC

ivankirigin wrote: post #2

The Hacker News community would do well to minimize discussions about optimal editors. It just isn't that interesting or important.

It's a bit shallow to sum a 5000 word essay which spans the history of the FSF, the rise of linux, and the cultural friction between the two, viewed (oddly, but intruigingly) through the lens of one's editor with 'you said editor, let's not talk about editors' .. well it's sort of missing the point of the essay, IMO.

Re: Thoughts on editors (Emacs in particular)

#19

Post by mdakin » Thu, Sep 13, 2007, 12:55 AM UTC

nostrademons wrote: post #17

mdakin wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand what you're saying but I think you're missing my point. If any tool was empirically "not good enough" or "crippling" it would be abandoned and the show would go on. The focus is on the end result. The SFP gets there one way or another.

Heh, you'd be surprised at how many businesses cling to crippling tools because management has made their decision and refuses to abandon it. Moreso with languages than with editors, though I know of companies that standardize on a toolset (often one that's not top-notch, though I don't know of any that would mandate something as ridiculous as Notepad) and refuse to let you use anything other than that. Sometimes cus…

Many of the projects I've worked on have succeeded in spite of lousy tools, insane deadlines and other various hardships. Those experiences were the genesis of my personal philosophy that good people get the job done one way or another. Luckily the people I've worked with have all been pretty smart!

Re: Thoughts on editors (Emacs in particular)

#20

Post by ivankirigin » Thu, Sep 13, 2007, 2:16 AM UTC

jsrfded wrote: post #18

ivankirigin wrote: post #2

The Hacker News community would do well to minimize discussions about optimal editors. It just isn't that interesting or important.

It's a bit shallow to sum a 5000 word essay which spans the history of the FSF, the rise of linux, and the cultural friction between the two, viewed (oddly, but intruigingly) through the lens of one's editor with 'you said editor, let's not talk about editors' .. well it's sort of missing the point of the essay, IMO.

I think you're right. I over-simplified things.

But that doesn't mean I find the discussion on this page interesting. Editors are very utilitarian, and for some reason lots of people talk about them. Feel free to have at it. I'll refrain from comment and up-votes.